W.   Q.   RILEY 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arciiive 

in  2007  witii  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


littp://www.arcliive.org/details/finalityofliiglierOOrileiala 


THE  iFINALITY 

OF  THE 

HIGHER    CRITICISM 


-OR- 


The  Theory  of  Evolution 
and  False  Theology 


BY 

C 

WILLIAM  B.  RILEY,  D.  D. 

Pastor  The  First  Baptist  Church 
MINNEAPOLIS 


Author  of  "  Vagariet  and  Verities,"  "The  Perennial  Revival, ' 
"Messages  for  the  Metropolis,"  etc. 


J^6  ^-4-S<^ 


10  TBI    CAUSS   OF  TRUTH 
this  vlumt  Is  afftctitnauly  dtdUtttd 


CopymoMTKO  MY 

W.  B.  RILEY. 

I90* 


A  FOREWORD. 


¥  N  publishing  a  volume,  one  should  have  a  very 
definite  object  to  accomplish.     Our  purpose  in 
putting  forth  "The  Finality  of  the  Higher  Criticism" 
will  appear  to  its  every  reader. 

We  confess  to  a  conscious  call  in  this  publica- 
tion, being  fully  persuaded  that  the  honor  of  Christ 
and  the  very  life  of  His  church  are  alike  endanger- 
ed by  the  doubting  spirit  now  brooding  over  the 
educational  institutions  of  America.  Is  it  not  high 
time  the  conservative  and  constructive  ministers  of 
our  country  united  forces  for  the  successful  defense 
of  "the  faith  once  delivered?" 

W.  B.  RILEY. 


r  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 

!       I.     The     Higher    Criticism    According    to 
^  Higher  Critics. 

II.     The   Prominence  of  Skepticism  in  our 
Schools. 

III.  The  Prevalence  of  Skepticism  in  our  Pul- 

pits. 

IV.  The  Theory  of  Evolution  and  False  The- 

ology. 

V.     The  Sacred  Scriptures — ^Are  they  Scien- 
tific? 

VI.     Fosterism — Or  the  Finality  of  the  Higher 
Criticism. 

VII.     R.  J.  Campbell's  Definition  of  the  New 
Theology. 

VIII.     Skepticism — Is  Satan  Actually  Back  of 
It? 

IX.     The  True  Scientific  Spirit  in  Scripture 
Study. 

X.    What  will  be  the  Religion  of  the  Future  ? 


Chapter  I. 

THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM    ACCORDING 
TO  HIGHER  CRITICS.  l 


"O  Timothy,  guard  that  which  is  committed 
unto  thee,  turning  away  from  the  profane  bab- 
blings and  oppositions  of  the  knowledge  which 
is  falsely  so-called;  which  some  professing,  have 
erred  concerning  the  faith."  (i  Tim.  6:20). 
This  is  Paul's  advice  to  Timothy,  his  son  and 
colaborer  in  the  Gospel.  Pretty  nearly  two  thous- 
and years  have  passed  since  the  Apostle  penned 
these  words,  and  yet  they  are  so  pertinent 
that  the  conservative  Senior  in  the  Gospel 
ministry  needs  not  to  change  one  word  when 
warning  his  Junior  against  the  skepticism  of 
those  present-day  scholars  who  assume  to  criti- 
cize the  Sacred  Scriptures.  It  would  be  difficult 
to  conceive  a  more  accurate  description  of  the 
character  and  custom  of  our  self-named  Critics, 
than  is  found  in  this  text. 

It  is  our  purpose  in  this  address  to  give  some 
time  to  the  consideration  of  Skepticism  and  the 


6  THE  FINALITY  OP 

Scholars,  and  we  prefer  to  be  specific,  dealing 
with  individual  scholars  whose  names  are  well- 
known,  and  whose  positions,  while  unquestionably 
critical,  are  not  so  radical  as  to  cause  repudiation 
by  their  own  brethren. 

As  a  lad,  hunting  in  the  South,  when  a  flock 
of  quails  rose  before  me,  I  always  shot  at  the 
flock,  and  was  greatly  mystified  that  I  so  seldom 
hit  anything.  Later,  I  learned  to  pick  out  my 
bird,  and  discovered,  to  my  surprise,  that  it  was 
easier  to  hit  one  than  it  was  all  of  them.  Admiral 
Togo,  in  his  naval  engagement  with  Rojestvent- 
sky,  illustrated  the  advantage  of  selecting  a  tar- 
get. His  order  was  that  the  ships  should  be 
sunken  one  at  a  time;  and  the  wisdom  appeared 
in  the  victory  won. 

Recently  two  men,  each  of  whom  proudly  as- 
sumes the  title  "Higher  Critic,"  have  combined 
their  pens  in  putting  forth  a  booklet  entitled 
"The  Higher  Criticism,"  in  which  they  assume 
to  instruct  the  public  regarding  their  science, 
and  to  show  its  right  to  universal  consideration, 
and  the  comparative  certainty  of  its  eventual 
adoption.  I  speak  of  R.  S.  Driver,  Regius  Pro- 
fessor of  Hebrew  at  Oxford,  and  A.  F.  Kirkpat- 
rick,  who  formerly  held  the  same  office  in  Cam- 
bridge. That  these  men  are  fairly  content  with 
this  putting  of  the  Higher  Critic's  position  is 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  / 

evident  in  the  fact  that  the  booklet  has  passed 
through  a  number  of  editions. 

As  capable  and  conservative  representatives  of 
the  school  to  which  they  belong,  we  propose  the 
consideration  of  their  statements  concerning  "The 
Higher  Criticism"  in  the  light  of  our  text. 

Paul's  first  requirement  of  Timothy  is  this — 

"guard  the  sacred  scriptures." 

If  one  runs  through  his  epistles  he  will  dis- 
cover that  Paul  regarded  nothing  else  "commit- 
ted" to  the  Gospel  ministry,  comparable  to  "the 
oracles  of  God."  Writing  to  the  Romans,  he 
speaks  of  the  advantages  the  Jews  enjoyed  "be- 
cause that  unto  them  were  committed  the  oracles 
of  God"  (Romans  3 :2).  Writing  to  the  Corinth- 
ians he  recognizes  the  necessity  of  "delivering 
that  which  he  had  also  received,"  namely,  the 
statements  of  the  Scriptures  (i  Cor.  15 :3-4).  In 
his  epistle  to  Titus  (1:3)  he  affirms  that  "God 
had  in  due  times  manifested  His  word  through 
preaching,  which  was  now  "committed  unto  him" 
according  to  the  command  of  God  our  Saviour. 
It  is  not  likely,  therefore,  that  he  has  else  in 
mind  than  the  same  sacred  oracles,  when  he  en- 
joins Timothy  to  "guard  that  which  is  commit- 
ted" unto  him.  His  injunction  to  Timothy  is 
equally  binding  on  the  present  Gospel  ministry. 


8  THE  FINALITY  OF 

At  what  points  do  we  need  to  guard  the 
Sacred  Scriptures  ? 

I.  At  the  point  of  the  truth  about  their  text. 
We  consent  with  Messrs.  Driver  and  Kirkpatrick 
that  "the  aim  of  the  Christian  student  is  truth," 
Let  us  have  truth  versus  error;  fact  versus  fic- 
tion; science  versus  speculation.  Conservatives 
ask  for  no  special  privileges  in  such  a  contest; 
for  no  compromise  in  that  conflict. 

To  the  conflict  then!  These  scholars  say  of 
the  text  of  the  sacred  Scripture,  "It  is  seriously 
corrupt."  ("The  Higher  Criticism,"  p.  5.)  We 
make  bold  to  affirm  that  such  a  claim  is  without 
scientific  confirmation.  Twenty-one  hundred 
years  ago  the  text  of  the  Old  Testament  was  in 
every  essential  respect  what  it  is  at  this  hour, 
as  one  will  discover  who  consults  the  Greek  trans- 
lation of  that  time.  And,  back  of  that  day 
greater  care  was  exercised  in  the  translation  of 
the  text  than  has  been  shown  by  modern  students. 
It  was  the  unerring  law,  among  the  ancient  priests 
and  scribes  to  regard  the  slightest  defect  sufficient 
to  vitiate  the  synagogue  roll ;  even  though  it  were 
but  the  blurring  of  the  letters,  brought  about  by 
the  reverent  kissing  of  the  same,  it  re- 
sulted in  the  condemnation  of  the  docu- 
ment. No  less  an  authority  than  Prof.  Sayce 
affirms  it  as  a  fact  that  the  most  minute  care 
was  bestowed  upon  the  accuracy  of  the  text; 


THE    HIGHER   CRITICISM  9 

and  the  work  was  done  with  such  "scrupulous 
honesty"  that  in  1,500  years  copies  of  one  vol- 
ume revealed  differences  but  slight  and  unimpor- 
tant. Those  unquestioned  scientists,  in  the  whole 
realm  of  Sacred  Scripture — Doctors  Westcott  and 
Hort — assert  that  of  the  many  manuscripts  gath- 
ered from  all  over  the  world,  written  on  cloth, 
skin,  parchment,  papyrus,  they  did  not  essentially 
differ  one  from  another  in  more  than  one  word 
in  a  thousand.  When  one  is  made  familiar  with 
this  fact,  he  is  convinced  that  our  critics  have 
"strained  at  a  gnat  and  swallowed  a  camel." 

2.  As  to  the  claims  of  Authorship.  Our 
scholarly  brethren — Driver  and  Kirkpatrick — tell 
us  (p.  6)  "Hicher  Criticism  has  investigated  the 
origin  of  the  various  books,"  and  they  announce 
the  result,  page  20,  "The  historical  books  are 
now  seen  to  be  not,  as  was  once  supposed,  the 
works  (for  instance)  of  Moses,  or  Joshua,  or 
Samuel,  but  are  compiled  out  of  the  writings  of 
distinct  and  independent  authors,  characterized  by 
different  styles  and  representing  different  points 
of  view,  which  were  combined  together  and  oth- 
erwise adjusted,  till  they  finally  assumed  their 
present  form." 

Is  that  the  truth  ?  The  science  of  Archeology 
contradicts  the  assertion.  The  Scriptures  name 
these  very  men,  Moses,  Joshua  and  Samuel,  as 


lO  THE  FINAI,ITY  OF 

among  their  authors ;  and  every  turn  of  the  spade 
is  giving  fresh  confirmation  to  their  claims.  The 
very  arguments  once  made  against  this  author- 
ship are  now  abandoned  by  the  critics  themselves. 
But  yesterday  they  were  affirming  that  writ- 
ing was  not  sufficiently  developed  in  Moses'  day 
to  make  it  possible  for  him  to  be  the  author  of 
the  Pentateuch.  Discoveries  drove  them  from 
that  position;  and  now  they  claim  that  if  Moses 
did  write  anything  at  all,  he  borrowed  it  in  the 
main  from  his  predecessors  to  have  his  produc- 
tions improved  and  redacted.  This  reminds 
one  of  Esop's  fable  of  the  wolf,  who 
threatened  the  lamb  because  he  fed  in  his  pas- 
ture. When  the  poor  little  thing  maintained  tliat 
he  had  never  tasted  grass,  his  mother's  milk 
having  sufficed,  the  wolf  then  charged  him  with 
drinking  from  his  spring.  That  accusation  be- 
ing answered  after  the  same  manner,  he  fell 
upon  him,  saying,  "Anyhow  I  will  not  be  cheated 
out  of  my  meal." 

The  Bible  seems  to  be  the  only  literary  struc- 
ture the  world  has  yet  produced  after  the  plan 
of  the  Cathedral  at  Milan,  requiring  generations 
of  workers  and  many  centuries  in  laying  its  foun- 
dations, perfecting  its  walls  and  completing  its 
cupolas.  Men  have  long  been  surprised  that 
the  name  of  the  original  architect  of  Milan's 
Cathedral  should  have  been  lost,  but  have  not 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  II 

disputed  that  Amadeo  was  the  author  of  many 
of  its  most  beautiful  designs,  nor  yet  that  Tibaldi 
conceived  the  ornamentation  of  doors  and  win- 
dows, while  Napoleon  saw  to  its  finishing 
touches.  But  here  we  have  a  literary  cathedral 
beside  which  every  other  output  of  mind  and  pen 
pales  as  the  stars  fade  before  the  rising  sun. 
Yet  the  scholars  would  have  us  believe  that  not 
only  is  the  original  architect  an  imknown  one, 
but  that  scarcely  a  man  who  wrought  upon  its 
foundations  or  finial  can  be  certainly  named.  If 
that  be  true,  it  is  the  strangest  circumstance  of  all 
human  history. 

We  are  familiar  with  the  story  of  how, 
after  the  repulse  of  the  great  Persian  invader, 
Greece  enacted  a  law  that  no  one,  under  penalty 
of  death,  should  espouse  art,  except  free  men.  On 
one  day  all  Greece  was  at  Athens  to  behold  an  ex- 
hibit in  the  Agora.  Pericles  presided,  with  As- 
pasia  at  his  side ;  while  Phidias,  Socrates,  Sopho- 
cles and  others  acted  as  judges.  A  group  far 
more  beautiful  than  the  rest  challenged  universal 
attention,  and  excited  the  envy  of  all  artists.  But 
to  the  herald's  repeated  question,  "Who  is  the 
sculptor  of  this  group?"  there  came  no  answer, 
and  the  conviction  settled  upon  them  that  it  must 
be  the  product  of  a  slave.  Amid  the  commotion, 
a  beautiful  maiden,  with  torn  dress  and  dishevel- 
ed hair,  was  dragged  into  the  Agora,  and  the 


12  THE  FINALITY   OF 

officers  cried  as  they  came,  "This  woman  knows 
the  sculptor."  To  all  their  questions  Cleone  was 
silent.  She  knew  that  if  she  should  speak  she 
sealed  her  brother's  doom.  When  Pericles  could 
get  nothing  from  her,  he  said,  "The  law  is  im- 
perative; take  the  maiden  to  the  dungeon."  A 
youth,  with  emaciated  face  and  flowing  hair  rush 
ed  from  his  hiding  place  and  cried,  "Oh,  Pericles, 
forgive  and  save  the  maiden.  She  is  my  sister. 
The  group  is  the  work  of  my  hands,  and  I  am 
but  a  slave."  The  crowd  cried  out,  "To  the  dun- 
geon with  him."  But  Pericles  answered,  "No, 
behold  that  group!  Apollo  decides  by  it  that 
there  is  something  higher  in  Greece  than  an  un- 
just law.  The  highest  purpose  of  law  should  be 
the  development  of  the  beautiful.  If  Athens  lives 
in  the  memory  and  affections  of  men,  it  is  her 
devotion  to  art  that  will  immortalize  her.  Not 
to  the  dungeon,  but  to  my  side  bring  the  youth." 
And  that  day  the  youth  was  crowned  by  Aspasia's 
hand  and  his  name  immortalized.  He  had  wrought 
so  great  a  work,  that  with  the  utmost  care  he 
could  not  escape  detection.  The  work  itself  com- 
pelled the  knowledge  of  him  and  created  a  place 
in  history  for  him. 

If  the  conclusion  of  the  scholars  from 
whom  I  have  quoted  is  correct,  we  face  this 
strangest  fact  of  history,  namely,  that  men,  the 
authors  of  such  institutions,  such  laws,  and  such 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  I3 

a  religion  as  the  world  has  never  known  beside, 
the  men  who  accomplished  a  work  that  only  gods 
might  ever  be  expected  to  complete,  did  it,  and 
disappeared,  leaving  no  name  behind,  not  a  foot- 
print by  which  we  can  trace  them  to  their  homes ; 
and  this  escape  was  accomplished  without  an 
endeavor.  Such  fictitious  characters  as  Moses, 
Joshua,  Samuel  and  David  they  have  immortaliz- 
ed, and  while  about  it,  effected,  forever,  a  person- 
al oblivion!  What  thinking  man  can  believe  it? 
The  genius  of  DaVinci  was  such  that  his  name 
is  immortalized.  Was  he  not  musician,  poet, 
sculptor  and  scientist  in  one?  How  could  men 
forget  him?  And  yet,  strangely  enough,  the 
scholarship  of  a  Driver  and  Kirkpatrick  insists 
that  the  man  who  was  the  author  of  a  Pentateuch 
— a  marvel  in  letters,  an  unequalled  genius  in 
organization,  a  statesman  of  the  highest  order, 
a  prophet  whose  vision  swept  the  unborn  centur- 
ies, dropped  out  of  history  and  left  neither  sepul- 
cher  that  can  be  known,  nor  residence  that  can  be 
determined,  nor  name  that  can  be  called  ?  Michael 
Angelo  combined  the  ability  of  a  great  poet  with 
the  art  of  a  peerless  painter,  and  the  achievements 
of  an  incomparable  architect.  No  wonder  men 
remember  him !  But  the  men  who  wrote  the 
Psalms  and  Prophets  gave  us  better  poetry  still, 
painted  more  lasting  pictures,  gave  form  to  more 
permanent  figures,  and  design  to  more  abiding 


14  THE  FINALITY  OF 

Structures,  and  yet  they  are  unknown,  if  Profes- 
sors Driver  and  Kirkpatrick  are  to  be  accepted. 
Who  believes  it  ?  Only  he  who  is  more  anxious  to 
secure  the  cheap  reputation  of  standing  with  the 
scholarly  than  to  search  the  pages  of  history 
and  investigate  the  conclusions  of  so-called 
science. 

3.  Concerning  the  historicity  of  recorded 
events.  The  same  gentlemen,  on  page  6  of 
"The  Higher  Criticism,"  say :  "Historical  Crit- 
icism affirms  that  much  of  the  history  has 
been  colored  by  the  beliefs  and  practices 
of  the  times  in  which  the  books  were  com- 
piled, long  after  the  event,  and  must  be  regarded 
as  rather  an  ideal,  than  an  actual  picture  of  na- 
tional life."  And  again,  page  24,  "In  the  early 
chapters  of  Genesis  we  are  not  reading  literal 
history,"  while  on  page  29  they  speak  of  "Scrip- 
ture history"  as  having  been  "gradually  shaped" 
into  its  present  form  by  "tradition." 

Perhaps  it  is  not  an  impertinent  question, 
"What  other  kind  of  history  is  there  be- 
side literal  history!"  Are  fiction  and  fable 
history?  Was  not  A.  J.  F.  Behrends  right 
when  he  spoke  of  idealized  history  as 
"idealized  nonsense?"  When  Mr.  Ingersoll 
was  alive  he  often  spoke  of  "The  mistakes  of 
Moses,"  to  the  delectation  of  a  shabby,  sinful,  and 
shouting  crowd.    But  have  our  scholars  gone  the 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  I5 

great  infidel  one  better,  and  made  it  out  tliat 
Moses  is  a  mistake ;  that  he  had  no  existence  other 
than  that  of  some  creative  imagination;  that 
Jonah  was  little  more  a  real  man  than  was  some 
hero  of  Ade's  "Stories  of  the  Streets  and  Town," 
or  Mark  Twain's  "Innocents  Abroad?"  If 
scholars  reach  such  conclusions,  let  them  not  in- 
sult our  intelligence  by  turning  back  to  us  to  say 
"But  all  this  renders  the  Bible  no  less  the  Word 
of  God."  (See  "The  Higher  Criticism,"  p.  8), 
When  we  have  no  better  basis  of  inspiration  than 
is  found  in  pure  fiction  and  distorted  facts,  hon- 
esty demands  that  we  fling  from  us  the  volume 
that,  claiming  to  be  a  Bible,  can  furnish  no  char- 
acter and  presents  no  more  rational  claims.  But, 
fortunately,  the  statement  of  these  gentlemen  is 
not  the  shibboleth  of  all  scholarship.  Prof.  Ira 
Price,  the  noted  archaeologist,  reminds  us  "that 
remains  of  all  the  principal  peoples  mentioned  in 
the  Old  Testament  now  decorate  the  cases  of  our 
museums,  and  tons  of  new  material  are  being 
gathered  in  at  the  end  of  every  season."  He 
remarks,  "These  records,  chiseled  in  adamantine 
volumes,  stamped  in  perishable  clay,  painted  in 
the  darkness  of  the  tombs,  or  cut  on  the  moun- 
tain side,  bring  impartial,  unimpeachable  and  con- 
clusive proof  of  the  veracity  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment." 


l6  THE   FINALITY   OF 

Paul's  injunction  to  Timothy  is  this — 

AVOID    THE    FALSE    SCHOLARSHIP. 

"Guard  that  which  is  committed  unto  thee, 
turning  away  from  the  profane  babblings  and  op- 
positions of  the  knowledge,  which  is  falsely  so- 
called."  In  reading  and  re-reading  "The  Higher 
Criticism"  we  have  carefully  inquired  after  the 
marks  of  "false  scholarship"  and  have  found 
three,  manifesting  themselves  in  this  single  pro- 
duction. 

Such  scholarship  is  self-assertive.  It  lays  un- 
warranted claim  to  accomplishments.  It  does  not 
hesitate  to  braggartly  make  mention  of  its  "as- 
sured results,"  in  the  very  same  breath  by  which 
it  has  disputed  the  most  sacred  claims  of  Scrip- 
ture. Some  of  us  thought  Mrs.  Eddy  slightly 
egotistical  when  she  claimed  that  her  writings 
were  "divine  and  apodictical,"  and  slightly  self- 
assertive  when  she  mentioned  her  own  book  ahead 
of  the  Bible,  as  essential  to  the  education  and 
redemption  of  the  earth.  But  our  Higher  Critics 
contend  with  her  for  the  chief  seat  in  the  syna- 
gogue of  self-esteem.  On  one  page  our  authors 
hesitate  not  to  say  concerning  the  Bible,  "We 
must  no  longer  talk  of  its  infallibility  and  its  in- 
accuracy" (p.  12)  ;  and  on  another  they  remind 
us  of  "the  assured  results  of  criticism/'  From 
their  standpoint  the  whole  field  of  so-called  Rev- 
elation, from  Genesis,   1:1  to  Revelation  22:21, 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  I7 

"is  filled  with  temporary  and  imperfect  elements," 
(p.  12),  while  they  modestly  (  ?)  admit  that  their 
well-cultivated  farm  of  "assured  results"  has  a 
little  "fringe  of  uncertainty,"  (p.  40),  and  that, 
mark  you,  as  a  result  of  "the  imperfection  or  of 
the  ambiguity  of  their  data,"  (p.  41).  Dr.  P.  S. 
Henson — Boston's  inimitable  orator — confesses 
that  in  his  early  youth,  he  was  constantly  distres3- 
ed  as  to  how  the  world  would  go  on  in  case  he 
died;  but  admits  that  maturity  relieved  him  of 
that  concern.  There  is  no  indication  in  "The 
Higher  Criticism"  that  Brethren  Driver  and 
Kirkpatrick  have  yet  escaped  apprehension  upon 
this  same  point,  for  since  their  scholarly  research 
has  produced  results  so  much  more  "sure"  than 
those  of  the  ancient  Scriptures,  it  would  seem 
that  a  premature  death  on  the  part  of  one,  or 
both  of  them,  might  even  yet  leave  the  world  in 
uncertain  light. 

A  second  mark  of  false-scholarship  is  seen  in 
its  self-contradiction.  On  page  10  of  "The  High- 
er Criticism"  one  reads.  "It  is  ridiculous  to  im- 
agine that  history  can  be  re-written  by  the  aid  of 
a  long  series  of  unsupported  guesses,  however  in- 
genious," while  on  page  36,  after  affirming  the 
inspiration  of  the  divine  writers,  they  explain 
their  history-making  as  follows:  "In  dealing 
with  the  earlier  period  in  which  no  sure  historical 
recollections  reached  back,  they    are    dependent 


l8  THE   FINALITY  OF 

doubtless  upon  popular  oral  tradition.  But  pen- 
etrated, as  they  were,  by  deep  moral  and  religious 
ideas,  and  possessing  profound  spiritual  sensibili- 
ties, they  so  fill  in  the  outlines,  furnished  by  tra- 
dition, that  the  events  or  personages  of  antiquity 
become  spiritually  significant,  embody  spiritual 
lessons,  or  become  spiritual  types."  A  wag  once 
remarked  that  his  chief  objection  to  lying  was  that 
it  required  such  a  good  memory  to  make  his  after 
tales  hang  together.  Not  all  of  the  self-styled 
scholars  of  the  century  have  been  blessed  with 
this  mental  trait  of  good  memory.  R.  F.  Horton, 
one  of  the  conservative  higher  critics  of  the  old 
world,  once  delivered  the  Yale  Lectures.  One  day 
he  said,  (Verbum  Dei,  p.  io6),  "All  the  great 
poets,  from  Homer  and  Hesiod  down  to  Browning 
and  Walt  Whitman  utter,  in  the  stress  of  their 
poetic  afflatus,  truths  and  feelings  which  we  can 
only  explain  by  attributing  them  to  God  Himself. 
Even  those  who  have  stained  their  white-winged 
robes  and  thrown  their  heavenly  crown  in  the 
dust,  if  they  are  real  poets,  will  utter  things 
which  are  as  truly  from  God  as  the  words  of  Ba- 
laam or  the  words  of  the  faithless  prophet  that 
spake  against  the  altar  at  Bethel.  Goethe  as  a 
man  seems  more  Hellenic  than  Christian ;  but 
Goethe  as  a  poet  has  said  things  which  we  can 
only  gratefully  acknowledge  come  from  God." 
Three  days  later,  in  lecturing  on  "The  Preacher's 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  19 

Personality,"  Mr.  Horton  remarked,  "I  have 
certainly  spoken  in  vain,  unless  you  are 
prepared  to  admit  that  while  God  may 
undoubtedly  speak  to  men  in  many  ways, 
and  without  any  human  intervention  at  all,  He 
will  not,  even  if  He  could,  use  evil  men  to  be  the 
ministrants  of  His  Word.  As  in  the  old  external 
covenant  they  must  be  pure  who  bare  the  vessels 
of  the  Lord,  so  in  the  spiritual  society  of  Christ — 
no  man  can  see  God  unless  he  is  pure  in  heart; 
and  no  man  can  either  receive,  or  deliver,  the 
Word  of  God  unless  he  is  inwardly  cleansed." 
When  was  Goethe  cleansed,  and  how  long  did  he 
stay  out  of  his  wallow? 

Another  has  called  attention  to  a  like  slip  on 
the  part  of  the  same  author  (  Verbum  Dei,  p.  107) . 
"The  unthinking  dogma  of  Orthodoxy  that  the 
Bible  as  such  is  the  Word  of  God,"  etc.,  and  later 
(Verbum  Dei,  p.  155),  "The  Bible  itself  is  in  so 
unique  and  peculiar  a  sense  the  Word  of  God," 
etc.  Be  true  in  statement  or  else  the  memory 
will  play  you  tricks  and  compel  you  lo  contradict 
yourself. 

A  third  mark  of  false-scholarship  is  that  it  is 
purely  speculative.  Messrs  Driver  and  Kirkpat- 
rick  seek  to  distinguish  between  what  they  call 
"speculative"  and  "sober"  criticism;  but  in  one 
place  admit  that  even  with  "sober"  criticism 
"many  of  the  conclusions  are  only  probable."  (p.9)^ 


20  THE  FINALITY  OF 

The  mistake  is  not  a  great  one ;  they  should  have 
said,  "Few  of  the  conclusions  are  probable."  It 
would  seem  that  the  so-called  "assured  results" 
of  Higher  Criticism  are  not  even  satisfying  their 
creators.  Not  long  since.  Dr.  Rade,  a  leading  ex- 
ponent of  this  so-called  science,  declared,  "Mod- 
ern theology  is  becoming  very  tired  in  its  re- 
searches. *  *  *  We  are  beginning  to  see  before  us 
certain  limitations  and  checks  to  our  further 
progress,"  while  Pastor  Steinmann,  long  an  ar- 
dent advocate  of  the  method,  published  an  article 
in  "The  Christliche  Welt"  in  which  he  voices  his 
fears  lest  the  whole  structure,  reared  by  the  crit- 
ical scholars,  shortly  fall  to  pieces  like  "a  house 
built  of  cards."  It  is  significant  to  say  the  least, 
that  so  great  an  authority  as  Prof.  Harnack 
should  sicken  of  his  own  speculations,  and  accept 
the  office  of  librarian,  rather  than  continue  his  re- 
searches after  "assured  results."  All  the  world 
knows,  how,  long  since.  Prof.  Sayce  repudiated 
his  own  published  conclusions,  and  denounced  the 
whole  method  as  speculative,  sinful  and  soul-de- 
stroying. A.  J.  F.  Behrends,  one  of  Amer- 
ica's most  scholarly  pastors,  poured  out  his  soul 
in  penitence  over  having  been  deceived  by  this  so- 
called  science,  and  in  turn  having  deceived  and 
misled  others.  Ah,  Paul's  injunction  to  Timothy 
has  occasion  still.  Let  "men  turn  from  the  oppo- 
sitions and  babblings  of  knowledge,  falsely  so- 
called." 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  21 

Finally,  listen  to  Paul's  hint,  of  further  obliga- 
tion as  a  good  minister  of  Jesus  Christ,  namely 
to 

DEFEND  THE  EAITH  ONCE  DELIVERED. 

What  is  that  faith  ?  The  Book  itself  answers. 
Dr.  William  H.  Bates,  has  recently  called  atten- 
tion to  the  Bible's  doctrine  of  its  own  inspiration, 
and  has  shown  that  it  sets  up  a  claim — clear, 
strong,  unequivocal,  to  the  effect  that  it  is  God- 
given,  infallible,  inerrant;  that  its  integrity  ex- 
tends to  history  as  well  as  to  morals  and  religion, 
and  involves  expression  as  well  as  thought.  And 
for  every  claim  he  adduces  and  even  multiplies 
his  texts.  (See  "Bible  Student  and  Teacher," 
June,  1906.) 

Christ  answers  that  question.  No  man  can 
read  the  New  Testament  and  doubt  that  to  Jesus 
of  Nazareth  the  "faith  once  delivered"  involved 
the  authority  and  integrity  of  the  Old  Testament. 
He  called  the  Pentateuch  "the  book  of  Moses" 
(Mark  12:26).  He  read  from  it,  and  from  the 
prophets,  in  the  synagogue.  (Luke  16:29-31).  He 
reminded  His  auditors  of  the  obligations  involved 
in  Moses'  commands.  (Matthew  8:4,  19:7-8; 
Mark  1:44;  Luke  5:14). 

Alexander  Patterson  calls  attention  to  the  cir- 
cumstance that  Jesus  cites  from  twelve  books  of 
the  Old  Testament  and  confirms  the  truth  ol 


22  THE   FINALITY  OF 

twenty-four  narratives,  as  follows :  Creation, 
Matt.  19:14;  Law  of  Marriage,  Matt.  19:5;  Cain 
and  Abel,  Matt.  23 125  ;  The  Deluge,  Matt.  24 137 ; 
Abraham,  John  8:56;  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  and 
Lot's  wife,  Luke  17:28-32;  Manna,  John  6:49; 
Brazen  Serpent,  John  3:14;  Shew  Bread,  Matt. 
12:3-4;  Elijah  and  his  Miracles,  Luke  4:25-26; 
Naaman,  Luke  4 :27 ;  Tyre  and  Sidon,  Matt.  1 1 : 
22;  Jonah  and  "The  Whale,"  Matt.  12:39;  The 
Books  of  Moses,  John  5 :46 ;  The  Psalms,  Luke 
20:42;  Moses  and  the  Prophets,  Luke  24:27; 
Isaiah,  Matt.  13:14;  Daniel's  prophecies.  Matt. 
25:15;  Malachi,  Matt.  11:10.  The  entire  Old 
Testament,  Luke  24 :44.  Of  not  one  of  these  does 
he  convey  the  slightest  hint  of  aught  but  trust- 
worthiness and  literal  interpretation.  It  is  note- 
worthy that  Christ  has  put  the  seal  of  his  approv- 
al upon  almost  every  point  disputed  by  our  so- 
called  scholars. 

Time  also  has  lent  its  testimony  to  the  trust- 
worthiness of  this  "faith."  "Of  making  books 
there  is  no  end."  To  make  a  contribution  to  lit- 
erature that  shall  live  is  not  so  easy.  P.  E.  Kipp 
said  truly,  "Literature  is  ephemeral  and  lasts  but 
a  day.  Of  the  three  million  volumes  in  the  library 
of  Paris,  only  a  few  thousand  are  what  may  be 
said  to  be  alive,  while  the  vast  numbers  are  bur- 
ied in  the  dust  of  oblivion,  and  are  mouldy  with 
neglect.    But  contrary  to  the  universal  law,  time 


the;  higher  criticism  23 

has  but  polished  the  Bible  as  the  ceaseless  waves 
polish  the  pebbles,  and  it  is  today  brighter  than  in 
all  the  thirty-five  centuries  of  its  existence.  It  has 
never  been  so  universally  studied,  never  so  widely 
circulated,  and  never  so  generally  accepted  as 
now,"  It  is  more  and  more  evident  that  the  Mas- 
ter will  make  His  prophecy  good,  "The  heavens 
and  the  earth  shall  pass  away,  but  not  one  jot 
or  tittle  of  all  that  God  hath  spoken  shall  fail." 

Bxperience  proves  the  redeeming  power  of 
the  "faith  once  delivered."  The  Bereans  "search- 
ed the  scriptures"  and  got  a  blessing.  Candace's 
treasurer  read  and  was  redeemed.  Peter's  audi- 
tors listened  while  he  rehearsed  what  God  had 
spoken,  and  lived !  From  that  early  hour  until 
now  not  an  earnest  soul,  searching  these  pages  for 
the  way  of  life,  has  searched  in  vain.  Only  yester- 
day we  looked  into  the  face  of  Jim  Berwick.  He 
is  the  best-known  and  most  universally  loved  rail- 
road conductor  in  America.  And  yet  Jim  is  not  a 
product  of  the  schools ;  his  learning  is  extremely 
limited.  He  is  not  a  man  of  large  means ;  his 
income  is  a  meager  one.  The  secret  of  his  suc- 
cess in  life  lies  in  the  single  circumstance,  that 
some  years  ago  he  began  to  search  the  pages 
of  Sacred  Writ.  His  first  discovery  was  the  dis- 
covery of  sin.  He  saw  himself  as  God  had  long 
seen  him — stained,  degraded,  undone.  He  read 
the  sentence  of  his  own  doom,  "no  drunkard  shall 


24  THE  FINALITY  OF 

enter  the  kingdom  of  heaven."  In  an  agony  of 
heart  he  searched  on  until  Jesus,  the  Lord  of 
Life,  loomed  before  him ;  and  by  the  printed  page 
He  spoke  as  clearly  to  Berwick  as  He  ever  spake 
to  the  blind  man  at  Jericho  or  to  the  cripple,  car- 
ried to  His  feet,  by  four ;  and  lo,  Jim  understood 
that  his  "sins  were  forgiven,"  and  his  blindness 
was  removed.  He  searched  on  until  his  justifi- 
cation before  God  was  revealed,  until  assurance 
became  his  sweet  experience,  until  santification 
was  being  accomplished  in  his  heart  by  that  same 
Word.  The  Scriptures  gave  birth  to  his  Christian 
character ;  by  them  he  is  sustaining  the  same,  and 
out  from  his  life  is  flowing  an  influence  as  holy 
as  was  hellish  the  one  which  formerly  went 
forth.  When  he  stands  before  the  gathered  crowds 
in  colleges  and  conventions,  men  forget  his  de- 
fective grammar  and  seeing  that  he  has  been  with 
Christ,  seek  to  be  instructed  of  him.  Some  days 
ago,  Jim  met  a  man  who  asked  him  if  he  had 
read  Owen,  Paine,  Hume  or  Ingersoll?  Jim  re- 
plied in  the  negative.  "Then  you  are  not  fit  to 
judge  what  is  right  until  you  have  read  the  other 
side  ?"  Jim  answered  him.  "You  know  the  kind 
of  a  man  I  was!"  "Yes!"  "You  know  what  I 
have  been  for  seventeen  years!"  "Yes!"  "Did 
you  ever  hear  of  the  reading  of  Paine  or  Ingersoll 
changing  a  man  like  that?"  "No!"  "Beloved," 
said  Jim,  "will  you  go  and  read  God's  Word?" 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  2$ 


Chapter  II. 

THE  PROMINENCE  OF  SKEPTICISM  IN 
OUR  SCHOOLS. 

"But  when  some  were  hardened  and  disobedi- 
ent, speaking  evil  of  the  way  before  the  multitude, 
he  departed  from  them  and  separated  the  dis- 
ciples, reasoning  daily  in  the  school  of  one  Tyan- 
nus.  This  continued  for  the  space  of  two  years ;  so 
that  all  they  that  dwelt  in  Asia  heard  the  word 
of  the  Lord,  both  Jews  and  Greeks."  (Acts  19:8- 
9).  In  the  previous  address  we  gave  considera- 
tion to  Paul's  injunction  to  Timothy;  at  this  time 
we  call  attention  to  the  same  apostle  at  work  in  a 
school.  He  was  born  to  educated  parents ;  he  was 
privileged  not  alone  the  best  school  of  his  time, 
but  sat  at  the  feet  of  the  greatest  instructor  of  the 
early  centuries — Gamaliel.  His  accomplishments 
are  evidenced  in  the  office  to  which  he  succeeded 
at  an  early  age ;  but  still  more  certainly  in  the  lit- 
erature which  he  has  left  us. 

The  name  "Tyrannus"  would  signify  that 
he  stood  in  the  hall    of    a  Greek  philosopher, 


26  THE   FINALITY  OF 

and  for  two  full  years  reasoned  with  the 
crowds  who  came  and  went,  showing  how 
Old  Testament  prophecy  was  fulfilled  in  the 
person  and  work  of  Jesus  Christ.  The  popularity 
of  his  work  is  argued  in  the  phrase  "All  they 
that  dwelt  in  Asia  heard  the  word,  both  Jews  and 
Greeks."  One  may  easily  believe  that  of  the  mul- 
titudes who  heard,  a  great  number  must  have 
become  converted  to  the  faith  that  was  in 
Christ. 

A  school  is  a  good  place  in  which  to  present 
the  truth.  To  it,  repair  youth — always  open- 
minded;  or  else  those  more  advanced  in  life, 
who  have  retained  their  anxiety  to  learn ;  and  the 
audience  is  one  of  special  and  interesting  charac- 
ter on  that  account.  In  our  day  and  country 
the.  school  is  one  of  the  most  marked  features  of 
our  civilization ;  it  is  everywhere  in  evidence ;  and 
its  purpose  is  supposed  to  be  the  impartation  and 
reception  of  truth. 

The  old  question  of  Pilate,  "What  is  truth?" 
can  never  become  obsolete,  for  the  simple  reason 
that  all  of  truth  can  never  be  known.  The  mod- 
ern conception  of  a  school  is  not  so  much  that  of 
a  bureau  of  information  as  it  is  a  room  of  in- 
quiry; and  since  skepticism  has  always  bristled 
with  interrogation  points,  and  delighted  in  asser- 
tions, it  is  natural  that  it  should  resort  to  this 
center  for  exploitation. 


r  THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  2/ 

It  will  not  be  disputed  that  skeptics  have  chos- 
en the  school  as 


THE  SEAT  OF  DISCUSSION. 

To  this  act  no  one  can  urge  a  valid  objec- 
tion. 

The  school  is  appointed  for  purposes  of  in- 
struction. The  child  begins  life  as  empty  in  mind 
as  nude  in  body.  The  old  word  "education"  has 
lost  its  original  meaning;  the  school  is  now  sup- 
posed to  put  into  the  mind  what  it  craves.  Dwight 
Hillis,  in  his  volume,  "A  Man's  Value  to  Society," 
says,  "The  school  is  to  help  the  boy  unpack  what 
intellectual  tools  he  has."  That  would  be  a  small 
job.  Who  can  tell  what  a  baby  thinks?  The 
school  is  intended  to  provide  him  with  intellect- 
ual tools,  and  to  train  him  in  the  use  of  them. 
The  child  begins  life  with  the  tool  box  empty, 
but  with  a  craving  for  knowledge  akin  to  that 
which  the  stomach  has  for  food.  Men  have  taken 
advantage  of  this,  and  Tyrannus  is  only  one  of 
the  thousands  who  have  opened  up  places  of  in- 
struction and  have  undertaken  to  provide  mental 
furniture. 

The  acquisition  of  knowledge  involves  inves- 
tigation. Inquiry  is  as  native  as  appetite,  and  by 
it  men  have  made  their  progress.  Parents  are 
sometimes  pestered  because     children     multiply 


28  THE   FINALITY   OF 

their  questions.  How  else  are  they  to  know  ?  If 
"civilization  is  a  process  of  self-correction,"  we 
can  only  be  corrected  by  information ;  and  infor- 
mation means  investigation.  Go  into  the  realm  of 
science,  if  you  please,  and  you  will  find  that  any 
certitudes  are  the  result  of  investigation.  Hippo- 
crates professed  to  be  a  great  physician,  a  medical 
scientist ;  but  men  investigated  his  claims  and  dis- 
covered his  mistakes.  Joseph  Parker  reminds  us 
that  when  Sir  Isaac  Newton  affirmed  that  white 
light  consisted  of  seven  different  colors  it  pro- 
duced a  "civil  war"  among  scientists.  But  inves- 
tigation demonstrated  his  claim.  Descartes  used 
to  be  regarded  as  a  kind  of  idol  and  to  be  ranked 
with  Plato  and  Aristotle  and  Bacon ;  but  investi- 
gation has  left  "the  majority  of  his  speculations 
to  lie  in  utter  ruin."  Such  instances  go  to  illus- 
trate the  Apostle  Paul's  words,  "Whether  there 
be  knowledge  (or  science)  it  shall  pass  away." 
But  any  science,  killed  by  investigation,  were  bet- 
ter dead.  A  nobler  one  will  take  its  place  and  the 
purpose  of  the  school  will  have  found  expression 
in  the  process.  The  truth  is  valuable  beyond  any 
man's  reputation;  and  real  science  is  more  to  be 
desired  than  the  retention  of  the  most  popular 
theory. 

The  Scriptures  are  entitled  to  no  special  ex- 
emption. Some  of  us,  in  boyhood,  may  have  be- 
lieved that  the  Bible  was  so  holy  a  book  that  to 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  29 

look  into  its  historical  veracity,  or  to  question  its 
claims  of  inspiration  were  "the  unpardonable 
sin."  If  so,  mature  years  changed  that  opinion 
in  favor  of  an  investigation  of  the  very  founda- 
tion of  one's  faith  that  he  may  know  why  he  be- 
lieves in  the  Bible  versus  the  Koran;  and  clings 
to  the  Sacred  Scriptures  as  against  the  Zend 
Avesta. 

There  is  not  an  Intelligent  conservative  who 
has  any  contention  with  the  student.  He  may 
object  to  the  critic,  for  criticism  is  commonly  a 
weakness  of  human  nature,  and  more  often  im- 
agines the  flaws  to  which  it  objects  than  it  cor- 
rects existing  ones.  Truly,  as  a  Conservative  re- 
marks, "We  are  not  afraid  of  light.  We  have  no 
fear  of  progress ;  we  pray  for  the  expansion  and 
sanctification  of  scholarship."  But  we  ask  for 
scholarship  versus  speculation ;  for  science  versus 
skepticism.  Why  should  lovers  of  the  Bible  fear 
any  sort  of  investigation  into  the  text  of  their 
Book — into  the  question  of  authorship;  into  its 
history;  into  its  prophecy;  into  its  gospels?  Is 
any  man  so  stupid  as  to  suppose  that  a  religion 
built  upon  the  foundation  of  falsehood  will  prove 
of  permanent  value  to  him?  To  charge  Conser- 
vatives with  such  a  conception  is  to  reveal  igno- 
rance of  their  character,  and  indifference  to  the 
ordinary  civilities  of  life.  Let  it  be  forever  un- 
derstood that  when  such  poets  as  Milton  and 


30  THE   FINALITY   OF 

Shakespeare,  such  philosophers  as  Bacon  and 
Newton,  such  statesmen  as  Bismarck  and  Glad- 
stone, such  reformers  as  Luther  and  Wycliff, 
such  scientists  as  Galileo  and  Faraday;  such 
preachers  as  Spurgeon  and  Parker,  such  theo- 
logical professors  as  Fisher  and  Broadus,  hold 
the  Bible  to  be  the  very  Word  of  God,  they  have 
not  done  it  by  closing  their  eyes  to  the  light  and 
truth,  but  by  being  convinced  that  this  Book  is 
the  embodiment  of  both. 

No,  our  objection  to  the  work  of  "The  Higher 
Critics"  is  on  other  grounds  altogether ;  it  has  to 
do  with  the  character  of  their  investigation.  We 
charge  that  they  have  deliberately  introduced 
intellectual  processes  which  may  be  properly  de- 
fined as 

A  SINISTER  METHOD. 

Permit  us  to  call  attention  to  four  objection- 
able elements  in  this  method. 

I — The  Adoption  of  a  false  term. 

"Science'  is  a  good  word,  and  is  properly 
employed  when  it  is  applied  to  the  realm  of  cer- 
tified knowledge;  but  when  pure  speculation  is 
denominated  "Science,"  language  suflfers  and  the 
unthinking  are  deceived.  We  do  not  hesitate  to 
say  that  this  is  just  the  conduct  of  "The  Higher 
Critics."    Their  attitude  toward  the  Old  Teste- 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  3I 

ment;  and  ever  increasingly,  their  attitude  to- 
ward the  New,  is  not  the  attitude  of  scientific  in- 
vestigation, but  of  skepticism.  What  one  of  them 
has  ever  demonstrated  by  archaeology,  or  history, 
that  the  Old  Testament  characters  were  mytho- 
logical, and  when  did  he  do  it;  that  the  Old 
Testment  history  was  only  "tradition"  finding  an 
eventually  improved  form  and  literary  expres- 
sion? What  one  of  them  has  massed  his  "many 
infallible  proofs"  against  the  deity  of  Jesus 
Christ,  the  record  of  His  miracle-working,  His 
atoning  sacrifice.  His  resurrection  from  the 
grave.  His  ascension  to  the  right  hand  of  God, 
His  ability  to  make  good  the  promise  of  return 
and  the  establishment  of  His  throne  in  the  earth  ? 
Yet  upon  all  these  matters  they  are  in  greater 
or  less  agreement;  but  the  agreement  is  an  as- 
sertion, not  a  demonstration.  Prof.  Geo.  B. 
Foster  demands,  with  reference  to  the  bodily  res- 
urrection of  Jesus  Christ,  "If  it  is  to  be  proven, 
it  is  to  be  proven  to  everyone,  the  most  unbeliev- 
ing— a  scientific  pagan  for  instance."  When  did 
these  gentlemen  present  any  such  proof  as  that 
of  their  critical  positions  ?  Who,  outside  of  them- 
selves, have  been  convinced  by  their  array  of  ar- 
guments, except  it  be  some  of  the  students  who 
have  sat  at  their  feet,  and  whose  mental  furni- 
ture was  so  scarce  that  even  doubt  found  greedy 
reception  ? 


32  THE   FINALITY   OF 

To  hear  these  men  exploit  the  defects  of  the 
Bible  reminds  one  of  Dr.  Jackson's  story  of  the 
two  gentlemen,  who,  as  they  were  walking  down 
a  business  street  saw  an  owl  perched  in  the  win- 
dow of  a  taxidermist.  "There,"  said  one,  "the 
man  who  stuffed  that  owl  did  not  know  what  he 
was  about ;  the  feet  are  not  properly  placed ;  the 
pose  of  the  head  is  bad ;  the  arrangement  of  the 
feathers  is  unnatural."  Just  then  the  owl  turned 
his  head  and  winked ;  and  the  self-appointed  orni- 
thologist went  his  way  in  chagrin.  But  Higher 
Critics  are  not  so  easily  ashamed;  ten  thousand 
of  their  speculations  have  fallen  to  the  ground 
before  living  facts,  and  yet  practically  every  one 
of  them  still  calls  his  vaporings  "Science." 
2 — The  creation  of  a  false  forum. 

Critics  remind  us  that  since  the  age  is  a  skep- 
tical one,  the  school  is  the  proper  place  for  its 
presentation.  They  argue  "Men  and  women  must 
meet  this  attack  upon  the  Scriptures  and  they  may 
as  well  do  it  in  their  early  life,"  and  so  men  like 
W.  N.  Clark,  George  B.  Foster,  Prof.  H.  C. 
Mitchell,Milton  S.  Terry,  President  Bowne,  Chan- 
cellors Hyde  and  Day,  not  to  speak  of  a  multitude 
of  others,  take  the  boys  at  Colgate,  Chicago,  Bos- 
ton, Yale,  etc.,  and  proceed  to  champion  skepti- 
cism in  their  presence,  and  array  their  arguments 
in  favor  of  its  reception,  and  when  the  Conserva- 
tives complain  that  such  is  not  the  purpose  of  a 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  33 

theological  seminary,  the  answer  is,  "These  men 
must  meet  skepticism;  why  not  in  their  youth?" 
The  question  is  not  difficult  to  answer.  Youth  i^ 
not  as  capable  as  maturity ;  the  pupil  is  not  sup- 
posed to  be  the  equal  of  the  professor;  the  boy 
fresh  from  the  farm  or  the  shop — with  little 
knowledge  of  either  science  or  Scripture — has  no 
fair  chance  against  the  man  who  has  practiced 
polemics  for  ten,  twenty  or  forty  years.  It  is  a 
world  where  men  have  to  fight  their  way,  but 
that  would  never  justify  me  in  putting  my  chil- 
dren into  a  roped  ring  against  a  Sullivan,  to  let 
him  bruise  their  eyes,  smash  their  noses, 
and  knock  out  their  teeth.  To  call  a 
class-room,  where  a  professor  dogmatizes, 
and  students  are  practically  compelled  to 
receive  what  is  said,  a  "forum  of  debate"  is  to 
juggle  with  terms  with  an  evil  intent.  To  jus- 
tify the  destruction  of  the  faith  in  which  one 
was  born,  and  in  which  his  forefathers  lived  victo- 
riously and  died  triumphantly,  before  he  becomes 
capable  of  deciding  whether  he  should  surrender 
or  retain  the  same,  is  a  piece  of  robbery  beside 
which  the  work  of  highwaymen  is  a  minor  inci- 
dent. To  see  how  such  men  as  these  would  fare 
if  you  pitted  them  against  their  equals,  and  see 
how  soon  the  suave  professor  would  lose  his 
sweetness,  and  what  appearance  he  would  make 
when  the  conflict  is  over,  one  needs  only  to  read 


54  THE   FINALITY   Of 

the  controversy  which  occurred  a  few  years  since 
between  Prof.  George  Burnam  Foster  and  the 
editor  of  the  Indiana  Baptist;  or  the  Chicago 
daily  papers'  report  of  the  tilt  between  Prof. 
Milton  S.  Terry  and  Evangelist  W.  L.  Munhall. 
Or,  if  one  takes  pleasure  in  a  fight  between 
preachers,  let  him  read  Dr.  Horton's  series  of 
"Tentative  Suggestions"  and  Joseph  Parker's  re- 
ply in  "None  Like  It."  In  every  instance  he  will 
see  illustrated  what  Parker  said  in  answer  to  the 
argument  of  those  who  do  not  receive  the  con- 
clusions of  the  skeptics,  but  who  object  to  their 
excoriation  on  the  ground  "These  are  nice  men 
and  perhaps  honest  in  their  convictions."  Parker 
says  "I  tremble  when  I  am  introduced  to  *a  nice 
man' ;  such  a  'nice  man',  such  a  'quiet  man',  such 
a  gentleman,'  "  You  never  know  what  a  man  is 
until  you  have  interfered  with  his  vested  inter- 
ests, or  until  you  have  seen  him  under  insult. 
Then  you  will  knew  how  "very  nice  a  man"  he  is, 
how  "extremely  quiet,"  how  absolutely  "modest." 
I  have  had  to  do  with  "nice  men"  until  I  dread 
the  term.    As  James  Russell  Lowell  put  it, 

"There's  a  deal  of  solid  kicking 
In  the  meekest  looking  mule." 

All   this   sweetness   of   temper   about   which 
professors   from   the   Chicago   University,   once 


THB  HIGHER  CRITICISM  35 

boasted  at  the  mention  of  Foster's  name,  faded 
when  the  editor  of  the  Indiana  Baptist  proved 
more  than  his  match  in  an  argument,  and  Foster, 
so  far  forgot  himself  as  to  descend  to  bilHngs- 
gate  and  say  at  one  time,  "This  is  false.'  "  Ke 
also  charged  the  editor  with  "misrepresentation, 
defamation,  vulgarity  and  abuse."  The  whole 
tone  of  his  expression,  in  a  series  of  replies,  is 
arrogant  and  ill-tempered.  The  halo  of  the  gen- 
tleness left  the  head  of  Terry  when  he  likened 
Dr.  Munhall  to  a  "cur  sitting  on  his  haunches, 
and  barking  at  the  blowing  of  Gabriel's  trumpet.'' 

In  a  real  forum  these  men  fare  so  badly  that 
sweetness  is  impossible;  but  in  a  school-room, 
where  their  titles,  dominating  position  and  vested 
powers  can  compel  attention,  why  should  they 
not  be  suave  for  the  very  sake  of  seduction  ? 
3 — The  adoption  of  a  false  philosophy. 

One  seldom  meets  a  young  graduate  from  the 
skeptical  theological  seminary,  but  he  will  find 
him  thanking  his  stars  that  he  has  studied  under 
"higher  critical"  professors.  If  he  has  received 
their  conclusions  he  is  as  cock-sure  of  the  results 
as  they  are;  and  if  he  has  rejected  them,  he  is 
taught  to  believe  that  he  is  all  the  better  for  hav- 
ing passed  through  a  period  of  awful  doubts ;  that 
his  standing  ground  is  all  the  more  sure,  because 
for  a  while  he  was  without  standing  ground ;  that 
the  Bread  of  Life  is  all  the  more  palatable  by  con- 


36  THE   FINALITY  OF 

trast  with  the  poison  of  which  he  has  tasted. 
Is  such  a  philosophy  sound?  Some  time  since 
the  Larchmont  was  sunken  at  sea.  and  one  hun- 
dred and  seventy  people  suddenly  found  them- 
selves struggling  in  the  coldest  v/aves.  Seventeen 
of  those  were  finally  saved ;  1 53  of  them  found  a 
grave  in  the  deep.  Shall  those  seventeen  toast 
their  shins  at  a  comfortable  hearth  and  express 
their  gratitude  that  the  Larchmont  went  down, 
since,  but  for  its  sinking,  they  never  could  have 
appreciated,  as  perfectly  as  they  ought,  the  de- 
lights of  standing  upon  the  solid  earth?  Such 
sentiment  would  sound  like  the  gibberish  of  the 
insane ;  and  would  express  an  utter  indifference 
to  the  fate  of  the  dead.  A  few  years  ago,  one  of 
the  noblest  men  I  ever  knew  in  the  ilcsh,  cut  from 
the  park  what  he  supposed  to  be  a  basket  full  of 
mushrooms.  His  entire  family  feasted  upon  them. 
Four  of  the  five  who  had  partaken  finally  recov- 
ered, but  in  less  than  forty-eight  hours  the  noble 
father  was  dead.  Would  our  theological  profes- 
sors advise  the  eating  of  toad-stools  that  those 
who  escaped  evil  results  should  the  more  appre- 
ciate the  real  mushroom?  And  yet,  if  one  had  to 
make  a  choice  between  surrendering  his  friend's 
body  to  the  poison  of  the  toadstool,  or  his  soul  to 
the  deadly  effect  of  unbelief,  he  would  be  a  false 
friend  indeed  who  hesitated  for  one  second  to 
choose  the  former ;  for  is  it  not  written,  "Whoso- 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  37 

ever  goeth  onward,  and  abideth  not  in  the  teach- 
ing of  Christ,  hath  not  God." 

4 — The  employment  of  foul  politics. 

It  is  one  of  the  wonders  of  the  present  day 
that  skeptical  men  have  so  speedily  succeeded  to 
so  many  professorships.  The  great  denomina- 
tions, an  overwhelming  majority  of  whose  mem- 
bers believe  the  Bible  from  cover  to  cover,  can  not 
understand  how  it  comes  about  that  so  many  in- 
structors are  skeptical.  The  unsuspecting  are  told 
that  this  is  in  consequence  of  the  superior  educa- 
tion of  these  men ;  and  that  intellectuality  and  in- 
fidelity are  now  almost  synonymous.  It  is  a  cute 
ruse  but  it  can  not  forever  remain  uncovered. 
Every  man  who  gets  at  all  close  to  the  denomina- 
tional machine  shortly  discovers  how  these  results 
are  secured.  There  is  many  a  loyal  Methodist 
who  goes  back  from  the  great  annual  gathering, 
sick  at  heart  by  reason  of  the  political  features  of 
the  assembly.  The  wires  that  were  supposed  to 
be  laid  underground  have  protruded,  and  we  have 
seen  them  pulled !  While  they  sometimes  appear 
in  the  candidacy  of  the  bishopric,  and  more  often 
in  connection  with  appointment  to  the  pastorate, 
the  school  office — its  presidency  and  professorship, 
is  where  the  great  coup  is  attempted ;  and  where 
the  skeptical,  and  of  course  the  "smart  men"(?) 
have  succeeded. 


38  THE  FINALITY  OP 

In  the  Baptist  denomination,  where  the  church 
polity  is  different,  the  political  aspirant  is  not 
lacking.  The  time  i  s  now  on,  when,  with 
that  denomination,  a  successful  essential  to 
school  appointment  seems  to  be  that  a 
man  should  have  expressed  his  do-jbt  req^arding 
the  trustworthiness  of  the  Bible,  and  so  becomes 
the  advanced  thinker.  This  promotion  does  not 
occur  often  enough,  and  so  a  Baptist  Congress 
is  organized  and  the  honored  name  of  the  denomi- 
nation is  compelled  to  play  tail  to  the  kite  of 
Higher  Critics.  Standing  committees  for  tlie  or- 
dination of  men  for  the  ministry,  the  general  ad- 
justment of  denominational  difficulties,  and  sub- 
rosa — for  the  power  of  pastoral  nomination- -are 
eloquently  argued  in  the  name  of  "Progress"  and 
"Advance." 

Since  the  Congregational  Church  Polity  is 
practically  the  same,  the  schemes  adopted  there 
follow  similar  Hnes;  and  with  kindred  results. 
In  the  effort  to  coup  the  whole  situation  "The 
Religious  Education  Association"  is  formed,  and 
one  in  ten  is  a  Conservative,  chosen  to  keep  up  ap- 
pearances of  equity.  This  association  proposes  to 
give  us  "new  (Higher  Critic)  methods"  and  "im- 
proved (Higher  Critic)  helps." 

Among  the  Presbyterians  of  America,  wire- 
pulling by  skeptics  has  not  been  so  successful ;  and 
in  some  notable  instances  the  men  who  laid  hold 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  39 

upon  them,  found  them  live  wires,  and  they  now  lie 
dead  at  the  place  where  they  accomplished  the 
touch.  But  it  is  more  and  more  becoming  known 
that  in  Scotland,  once  the  very  home  of  this  stal- 
wart folk,  conservatives  have  been  driven  from 
many  professorships,  where  unpleasant  treatment 
and  political  wire-pulling  methods  made  such  a 
thing  possible,  and  Prof.  James  Orr  is  permitted 
none  too  many  colleagues  "in  the  faith."  Sinis- 
ter methods  are  always,  and  everywhere,  open  to 
criticism,  but  when  skeptics  adopt  them  in  the 
name  of  "scholarship,"  it  is  an  occasion  for  such 
a  protest  as  the  great  denominations  ought  now 
to  utter;  and  by  an  unequivocal  voice,  forever 
end  these  methods. 

But,  in  conclusion, — 

THE  SORRY  RESULTS. 

Time  forbids  that  we  should  mention  more 
than  four  of  these : 

I.  The  original  purpose  of  the  school  is 
thwarted.  Every  school  in  the  land  is  established 
in  the  interest  of  truth.  Even  the  secular  schools 
are  supposed  to  impart  truth — the  truth  of  math- 
ematics, the  truth  of  history,  the  truth  of  botany, 
the  truth  of  geology,  the  truth  of  astronomy,  and 
so  on.  Christian  schools,  founded  and  endowed 
by  Christian  denominations,  are  set  for  all  of 
these,  and  for  the  exposition  of  the  Bible  addi- 


40  THE  FINALITY  OP 

tionally.  There  are  not  half  a  dozen  instances  in 
all  America,  where  schools  wearing  the  name  of 
any  one  of  the  great  denominations,  were  not 
founded  and  fostered  by  men  whose  faith  in  the 
utter  inspiration  of  the  Word  was  unshaken. 
What  right,  then,  has  infidel  teaching  within  these 
walls  ? 

It  seems  bad  enough  for  a  University  like  that 
of  Chicago  to  be  framed  on  a  Baptist  foundation, 
and  permit  a  man  to  stand  in  its  walls,  and  deny, 
in  the  presence  of  its  theological  students,  every 
fundamental  of  our  holy  faith,  even  though  it  be 
true  that  its  founder  and  principal  supporter  is 
alive  and  consent's!  How  much  more,  when  in 
such  an  institution  as  the  Northwestern  Univer- 
sity, baptized  in  the  blood  of  the  saints  of  the 
Methodist  church,  on  the  occasion  of  the  instal- 
lation of  President  James,  Prof.  Hyde  dares  to 
say,  "For  bishop  or  minister,  or  trustee,  or  pious 
layman,  to  interfere  with  the  teachings  of  a  com- 
petent university  professor  on  theological 
grounds,  is  as  wanton  and  brutal  an  act  as  it 
would  be  for  a  prize  fighter  to  step  into  the  pulpit 
and  knock  down  the  minister  because  he  happen- 
ed to  have  the  bigger  fist." 

Have  we  reached  the  time  when  a  skep- 
tical professor  is  so  important  that  he  can 
not  be  asked  to  answer  to  the  institution 
that    pays    his    salary,  or  to  the    denomination 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  4I 

that  founds  the  schcK)l  ?  Has  the  order  of  the  age 
been  inverted,  when  the  servant  becomes 
greater  than  his  lord?  Have  the  ethics  of 
the  twentieth  century,  at  the  touch  of  the 
Higher  Critics,  taken  such  a  turn  that 
Joseph  may  now  despoil  the  wife  of  Pharoah 
and  answer  to  neither  him  nor  God?  If  so,  the 
more  humble  folk  have  not  found  it  out.  God 
forbid  that  the  secret  leak !  Only  a  few  days  ago 
a  young  woman,  born  and  brought  up  in  a  non- 
evangelical  home,  bred  in  an  atmosphere  of  cere- 
monialism, accepted  the  gospel  of  regeneration, 
submitted  herself  to  the  ordinace  of  Bible  baptism, 
and  took  the  consequences  of  social  estrangement. 
But  she  had  been  a  teacher  in  the  school  of  the 
church  which  christened  her  in  infancy,  and  was 
now  urged  to  continue  in  the  same  position !  She 
answered,  "You  would  not  want  me  to  teach  your 
children  contrary  to  your  faith ;  and  believing  as 
I  now  do,  I  could  not  instruct  in  accordance  with 
it ;  and  of  course  it  would  not  be  right  for  me  to 
accept  your  money  for  my  support  while  teaching 
that  which  you  yourselves  refuse  and  reject."  She 
is  a  plain  girl,  in  a  rural  district,  where  the  Eng- 
lish is  poorly  spoken;  but  we  insist  that  her 
sense  of  right  is  the  sore  need  of  the  so-called  "ad- 
vanced thinkers"  of  the  age ;  and  that  if  they  en- 
joyed anything  akin  to  it  there  would  be  a  thou- 
sand resignations  from  American  professorships 


42  THE   FINALITY  OF 

before  the  breaking  of  another  morn.  But  a  false 
theology  never  produced  true  ethics,  and  it  never 
can !  Perhaps,  therefore,  we  should  not  complain 
of  these  men  who  jealously  guard  their  salaried 
positions,  while  they  are  about  destroying  the 
faith  that  made  them  possible;  for  it  is  an  open 
secret  that  not  all  of  them  could  secure  audiences, 
Ingersoll-like,  who  would  pay  $i.oo  a  head  to 
listen  to  attacks  upon  the  Word  of  God.  The 
custom  has  now  become  so  common  as  to  lose  its 
commercial  value.  And  if  these  skeptics  should 
resign,  how  could  they  maintain  their  families  ? 
2.  The  poor  student  is  speedily  despoiled. 
We  employ  the  term  "poor  student"  to  define  on 
the  one  side  the  deleterious  effects  of  infidelity 
upon  his  life;  and,  on  the  other,  to  describe  his 
ability.  It  is  a  strange  fact,  yet  an  incontroverti- 
ble one,  that  the  more  stupid  the  man,  the  more 
speedily  he  surrenders  to  new-fangled  notions. 
Some  of  the  men  we  knew  at  the  theological 
seminary  are  now  full-fledged  critics ;  but  not 
one  of  the  full  course  graduates  whose  grade  was 
80  to  100,  has  succumbed,  while  several  who  never 
did  finish  it,  and  never  could  finish  the  Seminary's 
course,  have,  by  a  six  weeks'  course  in  the  Chi- 
cago University,  made  the  great  discovery  that 
the  opening  chapters  of  Genesis  are  not  history, 
that  Abraham  was  a  tribe,  Jonah  a  myth  and 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  43 

Christ  a  mere  man  of  uncertain  ancestry  and  in- 
secure accomplishments. 

There  may  be  another  reason  for  all  this! 
Stupid  men — poor  students — do  not  speedily  rise 
in  the  public  estimation,  and  when  such  see  a 
man,  who  for  ten  years  held  an  unimportant  pas- 
torate in  their  denomination,  surrender  his  faith 
in  the  historicity  of  the  Old  Testament  and  his 
allegiance  to  the  great  doctrines  of  the  New,  and 
join  himself  to  a  body  of  so-called  liberal  think- 
ers, to  be  promoted  from  a  salary  of  $1200  to 
one  of  $5,000,  and  from  ministering  to  100  people 
to  the  pastorate  of  ten  times  that  number,  and 
from  being  ignored  by  his  own  denomination 
while  he  remained  with  them,  to  a  sudden  call  to 
be  the  University  preacher  of  the  denomination, 
left,  it  mightily  appeals  to  the  little  man.  This 
instance  is  well  known.  Who  knows  what  the 
surrender  of  the  faith  of  one's  fathers  and  of 
one's  Christ  may  accomplish  in  the  way  of  pro- 
motion? And  who  can  understand  what  a  sub- 
tle temptation  to  the  superficial  man,  is  the  repu- 
tation of  being  "scholarly?" 

On  the  other  hand,  when  the  good  student  is 
seduced  by  the  skepticism  that  wears  the  mask 
of  scholarship,  who  can  tell  what  sufferings  his 
believing  parents  and  friends  endure;  and  what 
pangs  may  yet  take  hold  upon  his  very  soul? 
We  listened  a  while  ago  to  an  honored  father  re- 


44  THE  FINALITY  OF 

late  the  story  of  having  dismissed  from  his  home 
a  noble  son,  whose  faith  in  the  Word  of  God 
was  unshaken,  and  whose  purpose  was  the  Gos- 
pel ministry,  to  receive  back  at  the  end  of  two 
years  an  utter  skeptic,  who  had,  as  a  result  of 
twenty-six  lectures  on  "The  Bible  as  Literature," 
decided  there  was  no  Gospel  to  preach;  and  with 
some  pangs  of  heart,  made  choice  of  another 
profession ! 

Yet,  we  ask  why  so  few  are  entering 
the  ministry?  If,  perchance,  one  continues  in 
his  ministry,  limping  his  way,  until  the  Lord, 
from  sheer  compassion,  drops  in  beside  him  and 
unfolds  the  truth  of  the  Word,  as  He  did  to  the 
two  on  the  way  to  Emmaus,  till  his  holden  eyes 
are  open,  he  may  come  forth  to  tell  the  world, 
as  one  has  already  said  of  his  experience,  "Sun- 
day after  Sunday  I  went  into  my  pulpit  while 
my  heart  was  ready  to  break.  I  had  lost  my 
childhood  faith  and  there  was  none  to  take  its 
place.  The  agony  of  the  22nd  Psalm  I  knew ; 
but  God  drew  me  out  of  the  engulfing  waters, 
out  of  the  pit  of  miry  clay ;  set  my  feet  upon  the 
rock;  established  my  going,  and  put  a  new  song 
into  my  mouth;  .  .  .  and  now  I  know  that  the 
Bible  is  God's  Book,  and  that  it  is  true."  But, 
withal,  he  will  have  to  weep  his  way  to  the  grave 
over  the  years  he  has  wasted  and  the  undoings 
he  has  wrought. 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  45 

3.  The  church  is  deceived  and  crippled.  How 
many  of  the  infected  graduates  of  our  skeptical 
seminaries  have  dared  to  tell  pulpit  committees, 
corresponding  with  reference  to  a  call,  just  what 
their  opinion  of  the  Old  Testament  was;  just 
what  they  should  say  on  the  subject  of  "corrupt 
texts;"  "imaginary  history,"  "myth,"  and  what 
more?  When  did  one  of  them  write  to  a  com- 
mittee frankly,  saying,  "If  I  come  to  your  pul- 
pit, I  expect  to  oppose  practically  every  article 
your  denomination  has  adopted  and  to  tear  to 
shreds  the  one  relating  itself  to  the  inspiration  of 
the  Bible?"  Why  should  not  these  gentlemen  be 
honest?  Time  and  again  I  have  said  in  my 
pulpit,  and  I  reaffirm  it,  that  if  people  do  not  be- 
lieve this  Book  to  be  God's  Word,  I  do  not  want 
them  in  the  membership  of  my  church.  How 
many  of  our  critics  dare  to  take  the  opposite 
side,  and  tell  their  congregation  frankly  that  if 
they  do  believe  it,  it  were  better  to  take  their 
letters  and  go  where  such  a  "fossil  faith"  is 
preached  ? 

It  is  related  that  Sam  Jones  used  to  have  a 
custom  of  saying  to  his  congregation,  "Now,  if 
you  don't  like  what  I  say,  just  get  up  and  rack 
out,"  and  nobody  moved.  Some  fellow,  seeing 
with  what  pleasantry  Sam's  congregation  re- 
ceived it,  thought  to  adopt  it,  and  he  rued  the  re- 
sult.   They  moved  almost  in  a  body.    Anything 


46  THB  FINALITY  OF 

like  a  candid  expression  of  their  convictions 
would  empty  many  of  the  churches  of  our  Higher 
Critics.  Of  course  in  answer  to  this,  it  is  said, 
"One  don't  need  to  preach  his  doubts;"  but  do 
our  brethren  intend  to  concede,  then,  that  their 
opinions  have  reached  no  firm  foundations;  that 
their  scholarship  is  not  scientific  and  positive; 
that  eternal  truth  is  not  with  them  ?  Hardly ; 
and  yet,  when  one  of  them  remarks,  as  we  have 
heard  a  number  of  them  do,  "I  say  these  things 
in  this  assembly  of  ministers ;  I  wouldn't  care  to 
preach  them  in  my  pulpit,"  he  forces  us  to  one 
of  tw«  opinions  of  him — either  he  is  not  con- 
vinced of  the  truth  or  else  he  is  a  coward. 

Finally,  Christ  is  betrayed  by  His  professed 
friends.  When  Judas  Iscariot  was  ready  to  de- 
liver Him  into  the  hands  of  His  enemies,  he 
turned  the  trick  by  a  kiss.  When  the  modern 
critic  undertakes  the  same  he  accomplishes  it  by 
an  eloquent  speech.  In  the  same  book  in  which 
Prof.  Foster  has  stripped  Christ  of  His  immac- 
ulate conception,  His  infinite  wisdom,  His  sacri- 
ficial death.  His  corporeal  resurrection,  and  His 
reputed  ascension,  he  has  paid  Him  a  multitude 
of  pleasing  compliments.  But  when  Judas  faced 
eternity  he  was  filled  with  a  fear  that  had  tor- 
ment, and  no  possible  search  revealed  to  him  a 
place  of  repentance.  Higher  Critics  either  know 
Christ  or  they  don't.     H  they  don't  know  Him, 


rut,  HIGHER  CRITICISM  47 

we  have  the  explanation  of  their  inability  to  re- 
ceive the  Word,  "for  the  natural  man  receiveth 
not  the  things  of  the  Spirit;"  if  they  once  knew 
Him,  and  were  tempted  away  by  this  subtle  ap- 
peal of  Satan,  "It  is  written"  that  "having  been 
enlightened;  having  tasted  of  the  heavenly  gift; 
having  been  made  partakers  of  the  Holy  Spirit ; 
and  tasted  the  good  Word  of  God,  and  the  powers 
of  the  age  to  come,  and  fallen  away,  it  is  impos- 
sible to  renew  them  again  unto  repentance,  see- 
ing they  crucify  to  themselves  the  Son  of  God 
afresh,  and  put  Him  to  an  open  shame." 

My  auditors,  let  me  implore  you  not  to  follow 
them  into  this  darkness  of  unbelief.  To  me  the 
most  terrible  description  of  hell  is  phrased  in 
the  expression  "outer  darkness."  Who  can  tell 
what  it  means  to  lose  the  light?  A  young  Bap- 
tis.t  minister,  making  his  way  by  ship  to  the  Holy 
Land,  was  visiting  in  Rome,  when  word  came 
that  smallpox  had  broken  out  on  board,  and  the 
ship  was  quarantined  against  his  return.  What 
ivas  his  dismay  a  few  days  later  to  find  himself 
in  that  far,  strange  city,  a  victim  of  the  dread 
malady.  A  native  who  could  speak  English  was 
his  nurse.  Day  after  day  the  disease  waxed ;  and 
his  vitality  waned.  One  morning,  after  a  fitful 
nap,  he  wakened.  His  first  thought  was,  "It  is 
night!"  Then  memory  wrought,  and  he  said, 
"But  a  few  moments  ago  and  the  sun  was  shining 


48  THE  FINALITY  OP 

into  the  window,"  and  with  anguish  that  told  the 
story  of  his  alarm,  he  cried,  "Oh,  Antonio!  Are 
you  there?"  And  then  asked,  "Is  it  day?"  Being 
answered  in  the  affirmative,  he  cried  again,  "Oh, 
Antonio!  I  am  blind!  I  am  blind!"  His  sight 
was  gone.  The  next  day  the  struggle  was  over. 
He  had  wakened  in  the  world  of  Light  and 
walked  the  streets  of  the  New  Jerusalem,  where 
neither  sun  nor  moon  are  needed,  "for  the  Lamb 
is  the  light  thereof."  But  the  man  who  meets 
the,  last  enemy  in  "the  darkness  of  unbe- 
lief" will  be  carried  down  by  him  into  that  "outer 
darkness"  of  which  Jesus  spake,  the  very  pall  of 
which  is  increased  by  "weeping  and  wailing  and 
gnashing  of  teeth."  When  the  blind  lead  the 
blind,  God  pity  them  both ! 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  49 


Chapter  III. 


THE  PREVALENCE  OF  SKEPTICISM  IN 
PULPITS. 

"Whosoever  goeth  onward  and  abideth  not  in 
the  teaching  of  Christ,  hath  not  God:  he  that 
abideth  in  the  teaching,  the  same  hath  both  the 
Father  and  the  Son.  If  any  one  cometh  unto  you, 
and  bringeth  not  this  teaching,  receive  him  not 
into  your  house,  and  give  him  no  greeting:  for 
he  that  giveth  him  greeting  partalceth  in  his  evil 
works."  (2  John  9-1 1).  This  text  is  chosen  as 
the  starting  point  for  this  discourse,  not  because  it 
involves  disfellowship,  but  because  it  describes, 
with  accuracy,  the  conduct  and  opinions  of  some 
who  now  occupy  evangelical  pulpits.  If  one  could 
exercise  his  own  preference  in  the  discussion  ol 
such  a  theme  as  this,  he  would  yield  to  the  temp- 
tation of  kindly  speech  at  the  expense  of  truth, 
and  of  compromise  at  the  cost  of  candor.  There 
is  no  more  painful  experience  than  that  of  be- 
ing compelled  to  impeach  either  the  motive  or  the 
conclusions  of  the  fellows  of  one's  own  profes- 
sion. And  yet  there  are  times  in  which  one  must 
make  choice  between  surrendering  the  very  name 


50  THE  FINALITY  OF 

of  his  calling,   or  else   disfellowship   those   who 
have  trailed  its  nobility  in  the  dust. 

In  the  profession  of  Bible  teaching  that  time 
is  now  on,  and  the  Scripture  selected  for  consid- 
eration plainly  indicates  the  conduct  which  must 
characterize  him  who  remains  loyal  to  "the  teach- 
ings of  the  Christ."  The  text  describes  the  pro- 
gressive pastor,  indicates  the  point  of  separation, 
and  demands  the  end  of  fraternity. 

THE  "progressive"  pastor. 

"Whosoever  goeth  onward  and  abideth  not  in 
the  teaching  of  Christ."  It  is  a  significant  fact  that 
the  very  phrase  "goeth  onward"  (proagon)  is 
practically  identical  with  our  word  "progressive" 
which  has  been  voluntarily  assumed  by  the  Bible 
critics  of  our  times. 

In  discussing  those  of  them  who  are  pastors, 
we  propose  to  follow  the  plan  adopted  in  deal- 
ing with  the  scholars — namely,  to  employ  the 
names  of  three  or  four  pastors  whose  wide-spread 
reputation,  lofty  position,  and  theological  opin- 
ions make  them  easily  leaders  among  so-called 
liberal  pastors,  and  invite  your  consideration  to 
their  recent  utterances.  Perhaps  none  will  object 
if  the  names  of  Dr.  Fischer,  pastor  at  Berlin, 
Germany ;  Dr.  R.  J.  Campbell,  successor  to  Joseph 
Parker,  London,  England;  Dr.  Crapsey,  recently 
removed  from  the  Episcopal  pastorate,  and  Dr. 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  5I 

Lyman  Abbott — the  best  known  Congregationai- 
ist  in  America,  are  chosen.  I  should  be  very  glad 
indeed,  being  a  Baptist,  to  name  a  notable  man 
of  my  own  denomination ;  but  while  we  are  honey- 
combed with  Higher  Criticism,  the  denomination 
has  no  pastor,  either  in  the  old  or  new  world, 
holding  to  higher  critical  views  and  at  the  same 
time  occupying  a  specially  exalted  pulpit. 

In  studying  the  utterances  of  the  above  nam- 
ed, and  even  of  scores  of  others  who  are  their 
confederates  in  opinion,  we  find  agreement  at 
three  points,  which  goes  to  make  up  the  claim  of 
the  progressive  pastor. 

I.  He  knows  his  methods  to  be  scientiUci 
Dr.  Fischer,  before  the  Convention  of  the  Protes- 
tant Verein  reminded  his  auditors  of  that  fact 
in  the  following  way:  "There  can  no  longer  be 
any  claim  to  a  revelation  in  the  old  sense  of  the 
word.  The  idea  is  not  in  agreement  with  the 
certain  results  of  modern  scicntiHc  research.  It 
is  beyond  doubt  that  the  investigations  of  science 
and  history,  and  the  unprejudiced  researches  in- 
to the  character  of  original  Christianity,  which 
have  been  going  on  for  about  seventy  years  with- 
out regard  to  dogmas  and  doctrines,  have  made 
religion  something  entirely  different  from  what  it 
had  traditionally  been  supposed  to  be,  etc."  His 
defenders  also  demanded  the  full  liberty  of  the- 
ological expression  in  the  name  of  "scientific  in- 


52  THE  FINALITY  OF 

dependence"  and  inveighed  against  the  abridging 
of  "freedom  of  expressing  theological  views  in 
the  churches"  and  of  the  "independence  of  scien- 
tific investigators." 

Dr.  Campbell,  in  his  very  recent  declaration 
concerning  what  he  calls  "Restated  Theology,"  re- 
minds the  public  that  "The  new  theology,  in  com- 
mon with  the  whole  scientific  world,  believes  that 
the  finite  universe  is  one  aspect  or  expression  of 
God,  but  it  thinks  of  'It'  or  'Him'  as  consciousness 
rather  than  a  blind  force,  thereby  differing  from 
some  scientists."  Dr.  Crapsey,  in  his  de- 
fense of  the  denial  of  the  Immaculate  Concep- 
tion, said  that  this  interpretation  has  been  forced 
upon  him  by  a  "knowledge  of  the  facts." 

Americans  are  well  enough  acquainted  with 
Lyman  Abbott's  positions  to  know  that  he  holds 
them  all  to  be  "scientific." 

Profession  is  one  thing;  possession  is  anoth- 
er. It  is  not  certain  that  there  is  a  scientist  in 
the  views  quoted.  The  Consistory  of  Berlin,  com- 
posed of  the  ecclesiastical  superiors  of  Dr.  Fisch- 
er, in  calling  upon  him  to  resign  his  office  on  ac- 
count of  preaching  contrary  to  the  doctrines  of 
the  church,  said,  "His  views  are  those  of  a  man 
who  is  not  yet  mature  in  his  theological  thinking:." 

If  any  one  ever  suspected  R.  J.  Campbell  of 
being  "scientific"  we  have  yet  to  learn  his  name. 
Even  Canon  Henson,  himself  a  radical  higher 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  53 

critic,  when  asked  whether  Campbell's  liberal 
movement  in  London  would  amount  to  anything, 
is  reputed  to  have  replied,  "No,  I  think  it  is  a 
tempest  in  a  teacup, ;  I  do  not  think  the  element  of 
a  movement  is  in  it  at  all." 

As  for  Dr.  Crapsey,  if  he  had  discovered 
"facts"  which  disproved  the  immaculate  conceo- 
tion,  he  should  have  marshalled  them  before  his 
judges  and  so  saved  both  himself  and  bis  mistak- 
en denomination. 

Dr.  Abbott's  science  is  not  that  of  an  investi- 
gator ;  but  that  of  an  orator,  whose  facts  are  com- 
monly eloquently  phrased  fancies. 

It  is  possible,  therefore,  that  these  gentlemen, 
in  common  with  the  great  company  who  call  them- 
selves "scientific,"  profess  that  which  they  do  not 
possess.  It  does  not  make  a  profession  scientific 
to  name  it  so.  An  old  colored  woman  in  the 
South  was  addressed  by  one  of  our  great  states- 
men, who  happened  to  be  riding  by  her  cabin, 
"Auntie,  are  those  your  boys  ?"  She  replied,  "Dey 
is  not  my  chillen ;  dey  is  my  grandchillcn." 
"What  are  their  names  ?"  "Well,  dem  chillen  has 
right  smaht  names ;  dis  one  is  named  de  Apossle 
Paul ;  and  dat  one  is  named  de  Epissle  Petah." 
But  the  name  did  not  make  an  apostle  of  the  first ; 
nor  an  epistle  of  the  second.  We  would  like 
some  gentleman  who  is  truly  scientific  to  pass 
judgment  upon  Campbell's  statement.  "The  whole 


54  THE  FINALITY  OP 

scientific  world  believes  that  the  finite  universe  is 
one  aspect  or  expression  of  God,  but  it  thinks  of 
It  or  Him  as  consciousness  rather  than  a  blind 
force,  thereby  differing  from  some  scientists." 
Who  are  the  scientists  that  do  not  belong  with 
"the  whole  scientific  world  ?"  Positively  a  speech 
like  that  reminds  one  of  nothing  so  much  as  the 
introductory  remark  of  a  colored  man  in  Texas 
on  the  occasion  of  Thanksgiving  day :  "My  bred- 
ren,  dis  am  de  day  when  de  gov'ment  of  dis 
United  States  calls  upon  de  hole  civilized  wurlu 
to  present  itself  a  livin'  sacrifice  to  demonstrate  de 
administration." 

I  do  not  say  that  the  man  who  claims  that 
his  theology  is  in  line  with  "the  whole  scientific- 
world"  is  non  compos  mentis;  he  may  yet  have 
some  notions  that  are  intelligent ;  but  in  all  likeli- 
hood they  are  few  enough  to  warrant  the  fumi- 
gation of  his  opinions  on  the  principle  that  was 
involved  in  the  report  of  "The  Baltimore  Ameri- 
can." A  man  said,  "Why  did  they  insist  on  fumi- 
gating that  poor  old  bookworm's  manuscripts  ?" 
to  which  his  friend  replied,  "I  suppose  they  were 
afraid  it  might  contain  some  germs  of  thought." 

2.  He  speaks  the  shibboleth  of  skepticism. 
Henry  Van  Dyke,  speaking  of  this  age  of  doubt, 
says,  "Its  coat  of  arms  is  an  interrogation  point 
rampant,  above  three  bishops  dormant,  and  its 
motto  is  Query?"    Later  he  argues  that  science 


THS  HIGHER  CRITICISM  55 

has  been  corralled  in  the  name  of  skepticism  and 

made  to  appear  hostile  to  religion?  In  literature 
"skepticism  in  all  its  shades  and  degrees,  from  the 
most  clear,  self-conscious  and  aggressive,  to  the 
most  vague,  diffused,  and  deprecatory,  is  reflected 
in  the  current  productions.  He  traces  it  in  the 
lay  sermons  of  Huxley,  Tyndall,  Harrison  and 
Clifford.  He  names  these  men  "Knight-errants 
of  Doubting  Castle."  He  affirms  that  skepticism 
hangs  like  a  cloud  over  the  fragmentary  but  ma- 
jestic life-philosophies  of  Carlyle  and  Emerson. 
He  remarks,  truly,  "in  the  vivid  and  picturesque 
historical  studies  of  Renan  and  Froude,  skepti- 
cism is  at  once  ironical  and  idealistic,  destructive 
and  dogmatic."  He  says,  "In  the  novels  of  un- 
flinching and  unblushing  naturalism,  like  those  of 
Zola  and  Maupassant,  and  the  later  work^  of 
Thomas  Hardy,  skepticism  speaks  with  a  harsh 
and  menacing  accent  of  the  emptiness  of  all  life 
and  the  futility  of  all  endeavor."  "In  many  of 
the  later  novels  of  the  day  we  find  no  recognition, 
even  between  the  lines,  of  the  influence  which 
the  idea  of  God  or  its  absence,  the  practice  of 
prayer  or  its  neglect,  actually  exercises  upon  the 
character  and  conduct  of  men."  He  affirms  that 
even  poetry  has  fallen  under  the  spell:  "we  hear 
today  the  voice  of  skepticism  most  clearly  'making 
abundant  music  around  an  elementary  nihilism, 
now  stripped  naked.' " 


56  THE  FINALITY  OP 

How  natural  that  men  should  inhale  what 
is  in  the  atmosphere,  and  ministers  are  only  men. 
There  was  a  time  when  the  preacher's  only  temp- 
tation was  to  carnality.  His  confidence  in  a  per- 
sonal God,  in  an  inspired  Book,  in  a  sin-bearing 
Saviour  was  not  only  unshaken,  it  was  undis- 
turbed. The  times  were  slow  and  it  was  not  diffi- 
cult for  him  to  be  always  abreast  of  them;  now 
they  are  steaming  and  flashing  like  lightning  and 
he  is  told  he  must  keep  abreast  still,  and  the  times 
are  skeptical,  "li  I  hold  to  'the  faith  once  de- 
livered' how  can  I  deal  with  an  age  which  has 
denied  it?  How  can  I  gain  audience  with  men 
who  have  pushed  past  the  position  I  occupy  ?  How 
can  I  command  the  respect,  and  accomplish  the 
conversion  of  those  who  subscribe  to  the  latest 
scientific  magazine,  unless  I  speak  their  shibbo- 
leth, and  let  them  know  that  I  still  stand  at  their 
side  ?"  This  is  the  subtle  temptation !  Men,  and 
even  ministers  forget  that  the  way  to  turn  back 
the  galloping  herd,  is  not  to  take  their  course 
and  keep  up  with  them,  but  to  take  a  stand  and 
call  after  them.  The  skeptical  preacher  can  no 
more  assist  the  skeptical  sinner  than  a  drowning 
man  can  assist  his  sinking  friend.  Christ  was  not 
speaking  of  a  journey  in  unbelief  when  he  said, 
"Whosoever  shall  compel  thee  to  go  with  him  one 
mile,  go  with  him  twain." 

All  through  the  Northland  of    the     United 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  57 

States,  our  so-called  "sacred  press"  teems  with  ar- 
ticles written  by  advanced  thinkers  who  are  tell- 
ing us  how  up-to-date  theology  is  essential  to 
success  in  dealing  with  the  keen,  well-trained  in- 
tellects of  the  hour.  But  the  reports  made  at  ev- 
ery annual  gathering,  of  men,  women  and  chil- 
dren won  even  to  their  churches,  not  to  say  to 
Christ,  belie  their  boast.  A  more  ineffectual 
gospel  has  never  been  preached  than  that  which 
Mr.  Campbell  names  "The  New  Theology ;"  and 
as  for  its  advocates  in  the  pulpit,  it  is  a  notorious 
fact  that  if  Conservatives  did  not  visit  their 
churches  once  a  year  to  hold  a  series  of  meetings 
they  would  face  the  shame  of  utter  failure  in 
reaching  men.  The  only  point  of  profit,  therefore, 
in  this  whole  position,  seems  to  be  that  which  Vic- 
tor Hugo  sums  up  when  speaking  of  Tholomeys, 
the  rich  old  roue,  who  had  "replaced  his  teeth 
by  jests,  and  his  hair  by  joy,  and  his  health  by 
irony,  and  made  verses  now  and  then  on  any  suIj- 
ject."  "However,"  said  Hugo,  "he  doubted  ev- 
erything with  an  air  of  superiority — a  great  pow- 
er in  the  eyes  of  the  weak." 

3.  To  the  progressive  pastor  the  faith  of  the 
fathers  is  fogyism.  There  is  not  one  of  these  pas- 
tors but  has  at  some  time  spoken  of  the  convic- 
tions of  the  Conservatives  as  "the  traditional 
view."  When  the  great  Gladstone  was  alive  and 
writing  his  book  "The    Impregnable    Ri/ck    of 


58  THE  FINALITY  OF 

Holy  Scripture"  he  spoke  of  Prof.  Huxley's  de- 
scription of  the  battle  of  Faith  in  whicli  Huxley 
speaks  of  "the  old  fashioned  artillery"  of  the 
churches  on  the  one  side  and  the  "weapons  of  pre- 
cision" used  by  the  advancing  forces  of  science  on 
the  other.  Think,  will  you,  of  Joseph  Parker,  in 
London,  England,  battling  away  with  nothing 
better  than  the  "old-fashioned  artillery"  of  the 
churches — "The  Gospel"  of  which  Paul  was  "not 
ashamed;"  while  his  successor  in  office,  R.  J. 
Campbell,  comes  to  the  conflict  with  the  "weapons 
of  precision" — the  development  of  Modern  Sci- 
ence. And  yet,  somehow  or  other,  Parker  ac- 
complished things, — constructed  a  great  building ; 
called  together  a  great  congregation,  produced 
great  books,  and  better  yet,  aided  in  the  great 
development  of  hundreds  and  thousands  of  lives. 
Now  his  successor,  R.  J.  Campbell,  with  the 
"weapons  of  precision — the  development  of  mod- 
ern science"  is  destroying  a  congregation,  weak- 
ening the  faith  of  his  fellows,  starting  on  a  cam- 
paign in  the  interests  of  "restated  theology"  that 
his  confrere  in  skepticism.  Canon  Henson,  calls, 
"a  storm  in  a  teacup,  with  no  element  of  a  move- 
ment in  it." 

Joseph  Parker  proudly  confesses  his  allegiance 
to  "the  faith  once  delivered;"  "the  faith  of  the 
fathers;"  the  faith  that  presents  "a  personal 
God ;"  "an  infallible  Book,"  "a  Divine  Christ,"  "a 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  59 

salvation  from  sin  through  His  sufferings " 
There  are  "dogmas"  in  that  faith ;  but  dogma  does 
not  necessarily  oppose  science;  it  may  express  it. 
There  is  nothing  in  all  the  universe  so  uncom- 
promising, so  dogmatic  as  science — which  is  also 
God's  revelation.  Conservatives  do  not  hold  their 
dogmas  simply  because  they  have  been  stated  and 
their  fathers  have  held  them  true;  they  believe 
them  on  scientific  grounds.  "The  heavens  de- 
clare the  glory  of  God  and  the  firmament  show- 
eth  his  handiwork."  It  is  the  work  of  a  person, 
not  of  a  "force;"  of  intelligence,  not  of  "fortui- 
tous circumstances."  They  believe  the  Bible  to  be 
inspired  because  there  is  every  evidence  of  it! 
The  historical  evidence  is  conclusive!  It  is  far 
more  reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  nations  round 
about  Israel  borrowed  from  Israel's  faith  and  cor- 
rupted what  they  borrowed^  than  it  is  to  believe 
that  Israel  borrowed  from  the  nations  round 
about  and  completed  what  she  borrowed.  It  may 
not  be  in  keeping  with  the  exploded  theory  of 
evolution,  but  it  is  in  perfect  accord  with  the  facts 
of  history  that  men  more  often  and  more  easily 
build  up  a  false  faith  than  they  construct  a  true 
one.  We  believe  that  Christ  was  the  Son  of  God 
because  it  does  not  offend  our  reason.  There  is 
nothing  unreasonable  in  the  idea  that  God  should 
beget,  in  the  flesh — One  like  unto  Himself — and 
give  His  Son  to  the  world  as  the  Saviour  from 


60  THE  FINALITY  OP 

its  sins.  To  deny  that  is  to  deny  the  central  truth 
of  all  theology — old  or  new — namely,  "God  is 
Love."  "Greater  love  hath  no  man  than  this, 
that  a  man  lay  down  his  life  for  his  friends,  but 
God  commended  his  love  toward  us  in  that  while 
we  were  yet  sinners  Christ  died  for  us."  The 
Bible  plan  of  salvation  appeals  to  Reason. 

We  believe  that  His  death  was  an  atonement 
for  sin  partly  because  it  is  according  to  Revela- 
tion ;  but  particularly  because  it  is  according  to 
Reason.  All  that  we  know  in  this  life  confirms 
that  claim.  There  is  no  sin  that  is  ever  atoned 
for  without  the  suffering  of  somebody — and 
quite  often  the  innocent  have  to  suffer  for  the 
guilty.  Call  it  dogmatic  if  you  like ;  name  its  ad- 
vocates "back-numbers,"  speak  of  them  as  "old 
fogies"  and  all  that;  but  do  not  forget  that  up 
to  this  present  time,  with  all  your  boasted  prog- 
ress, you  cannot  present  a  point  of  improvement 
upon  the  old  theory  and  the  old  Book.  What  have 
you  added  to  its  moral  code?  What  satisfactory 
substitute  have  you  given  for  the  old  doctrine  of 
inspiration?  What  have  you  permanently  sub- 
tracted from  it  to  make  it  more  trustworthy? 
The  world  is  waiting  for  a  better  theory  of  crea- 
tion than  Genesis  i  :i — "In  the  beginning  God 
created  the  heaven  and  the  earth;"  for  a  better 
plan  of  salvation  than  John  3:16 — "God  so  loved 
the  world  that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  son,  that 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  6l 

whosoever  believeth  in  him  should  not  perish,  but 
have  everlasting  life ;"  for  a  more  satisfactory  ex- 
pression of  inspiration  than  Hebrews  i  :i — "God, 
who  at  sundry  times  and  in  divers  manners,  spake 
in  time  past  unto  the  fathers  by  the  prophets,  hath 
in  the  end  of  these  days  spoken  unto  us  in  His 
Son." 

THE  POINT  OF  SEPARATION. 

"If  any  one  cometh  unto  you  and  bringeth 
not  this  teaching  receive  him  not  into  your 
house  and  give  him  no  greeting." 

There  can  be  no  controversy  concerning  the 
meaning  of  this  passage.  To  accept  it  at  what 
it  says  necessitates  separation  from  those  who 
deny  "the  teachings  of  Christ."  It  is  plainly  af- 
firmed "They  have  not  God." 

But  this  involves  other  questions. — 

How  do  zve  know  what  Christ  taught?  What 
are  the  sources  of  information?  Conservatives 
say,  "the  Gospels ;  the  Book  of  the  Acts,  and  some 
of  the  epistles."  Here  we  have  the  purported  re- 
port of  the  teachings  of  Christ  by  eye-witnesses. 
They  report  Christ  as  having  been  begotten  by 
the  Holy  Spirit,  in  keeping  with  prophecy.  ( Matt. 
1:20,  23).  They  report  Christ  as  having  claimed 
equality  with  the  Father,  "I  and  my  father  are 
one."     They  report  Christ  as  having  willingly 


62  THE  FINALITY  OF 

laid  down  His  own  life,  "I  lay  down  my  life ;  no 
man  taketh  it  from  me."  They  report  Christ  as 
having  taught  that  salvation  depended  upon  one's 
faith  in  Him,  "No  man  cometh  unto  the  Father 
but  by  me."  They  report  Christ  as  having  risen 
from  the  dead,  and  record  many  of  His  post- 
resurrection  teachings.  They  report  Christ  as 
having  ascended  up  to  the  right  hand  of  God; 
and  record  what  He  said  in  the  very  act  of  as- 
cent. 

Now  our  progressive  pastors  are  almost  at 
one  in  insisting  that  "the  Gospels  are  full  of  er- 
rors, and  demand  in  various  parts  very  unequal 
credence."  Mr.  W.  H.  Mallock  says  "They  speak 
of  Christ's  spoken  discourses  as  'often  nothing 
more  than  vague  conjectures  of  the  evangelists.'  " 
They  describe  them  as  "subjective  visions,"  "un- 
warranted imaginations,"  etc.  Perhaps  these  Pro- 
gressives will  permit  a  question  ?  "How  do  they 
know  these  things  ?"  Conservatives  have  the  tes- 
timony of  eye-witnesses  concerning  the  teachings 
of  Jesus.  No  intelligent  man  will  claim  that 
the  canon  of  the  New  Testament  is  essentially 
changed  from  what  it  was  when  first  it  came  from 
the  hands  of  its  authors.  And  it  is  by  the  writ- 
ings of  these  men  that  our  Christ  lives  in  our 
faith.  Who  created  the  Christ  "Progressives"  de- 
scribe? What  witnesses  have  they  as  to  who  He 
was  and  what  He  taught?     Is  it  possible  that 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  63 

critics  in  the  pastorate  have  accomplished  what 
critics  in  the  schools  sa^y  is  an  impossibility  ?  Have 
we  not  already  read  from  Dr.  Driver,  "It  is  ri- 
diculous to  imagine  that  history  can  be  rewritten 
by  a  series  of  unsupported  guesses,  however  in- 
genious." What  scientific  support  have  these  gen- 
tlemen for  their  guesses?  R.  F.  Horton  tells 
us  that  in  the  ruined  abbey  of  St.  Albans  the 
restorers  found  unnumbered  fragments  of  paint- 
ed stone  trodden  into  the  ground  behind  the 
chancel.  "When  these  were  collected  and  care- 
fully placed  together  the  shrine  of  the  saint  was 
recovered,  which  stands  now  in  its  completeness, 
a  visible  proof  that  the  fragments  had  originally 
belonged  to  the  whole.  In  the  same  way  we  are 
able  to  take  the  scattered  utterances,  the  thoughts 
of  Jesus,  and  fit  them  together  until  a  lovely  and 
harmonious  structure  of  doctrine  arises  before 
our  eyes." 

But  whence  are  we  to  find  them?  The  Con- 
servatives bring  the  material  for  the  image  of 
their  Christ  from  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  John, 
and  Acts.  The  Progressives  have  repudiated  these 
as  non-dependable.  W^ho  is  providing  them  with 
the  material  which  they  are  piecing  together? 
Matthew  we  know,  Luke  we  know,  Mark  we 
know,  John  we  know,  Paul  we  know;  but  who 
are  these  that  are  providing  material  out  of  which 
the  Christ  of  "new  theology"  is  being  created? 


64  THE  FINALITY  OF 

Our  policy  is  expressed  in  Scripture  thus: 
"Search  the  scriptures  for  they  are  they  that  tes- 
tify of  me."  Let  Progressives  tell  us  whence  they 
bring  their  testimony,  seeing  that  they  have  al- 
ready discarded  what  prophet  and  apostle  have 
said. 

Who  refuses  to  abide  in  Christ's  teaching  ^^ 
The  man  who  denies  that  God  is  the  Father  of 
Christ,  for  Christ  claimed  it ;  the  man  who  denies 
that  Christ  is  the  equal  of  God,  for  Christ  claimed 
that ;  the  man  who  denies  that  Christ  died  for  sin- 
ners, Christ  affirmed  it;  the  man  who  denies  that 
Christ  was  raised  on  the  third  day,  Christ  pre- 
dicted it,  and  afterward  proclaimed  its  fulfillment ; 
the  man  who  denies  that  Christ  ascended  bodily 
into  the  heavens,  Christ  promised  it  and  in  the 
presence  of  above  five  hundred  witnesses  accom- 
plished it ;  the  man  who  denies  that  Christ  is  com- 
ing again  with  His  holy  angels  to  reign  in  the 
earth,  it  is  Christ's  repeated  assertion.  There  is 
not  a  one  of  these  doctrines  that  higher  critical  pas- 
tors have  not  opposed  and  even  excoriated.  Fisch- 
er did  it  in  Berlin ;  Campbell  has  just  accomplish- 
ed it  in  London.  He  affirms  that  Christ  is  no  more 
divine  than  we  are;  he  affirms  that  man  is  not  a 
sinner,  but  an  increasing  conquerer,  saying,  "The 
fall  of  man  in  a  literal  sense  is  untrue."  "The  doc- 
trine of  sin  which  holds  us  to  be  blameable  for 
deeds  that  we  cannot  help,  we  believe  to  be   a 


THE    HIGHER   CRITICISM  65 

false  view."  Again,  "We  reject  wholly  the  com- 
mon interpretation  of  the  atonement,  that  another 
is  beaten  for  our  fault."  "We  believe  not  in  the 
final  judgment,  but  in  the  judgment  that  is  ever 
progressing,  etc." 

Dr.  Bettex,  one  of  Germany's  greatest  schol- 
ars, in  his  book,"The  Bible— the  Word  of  God," 
sums  up  the  views  of  "Progressives,"  after  this 
manner,  "According  to  this  radical  criticism  is 
there  any  inspiration?  None!  Any  Trinity? 
None !  Any  fall  into  sin  ?  None  1  Any  devil  or 
angel  ?  None !  Any  miracles  ?  None.  Any  law 
from  Mount  Sinai?  None!  Any  wrath  of  God! 
No !  Is  the  death  of  Christ  vicarious  ?  No !  Did 
Christ  rise  from  the  dead  ?  No !  Has  there  been 
any  outpouring  of  the  Holy  Ghost?  No!  W^ill 
there  be  any  resurrection  of  all  the  dead,  or  a 
final  judgment?    No." 

But  even  all  of  this  is  not  the  end.  Dr.  Ly- 
man Abbott,  not  many  months  since,  before  one 
of  our  greatest  universities,  defined  God  as  "A 
Force."  Dr.  Campbell  says  "The  new  theology 
thinks  of  IT  or  HIM  as  consciousness."  Here 
is  a  point,  at  least,  in  which  they  approach  "sci* 
ence"  but  it  is  the  "science"  of  Mrs.  Eddy,  who 
asks  the  question,  "is  God  a  person?"  and  an- 
swers it,  "No!  God  is  not  a  person;  God  is  a 
principle." 


66  THE  FINALITY  0» 

It  would  seem  as  if  we  are  not  far  from  the 
day  when  ministers  of  the  Gospel  will  have  to  do 
as  Dr.  A.  C.  Dixon  did  in  a  convention  of  free- 
thinkers in  New  York  City.  An  up-to-date  the- 
ologian, in  the  person  of  a  lawyer,  had  made  an 
eloquent  address,  one  sentence  of  which  was  "I 
worship  the  everlasting  IT."  When  Dixon  came 
to  deliver  himself  on  "The  Simplicity  of  the  Gos- 
pel" he  said,  "Brethren,  if  many  of  you  are  at 
the  shrine  of  the  former  speaker,  let  me  utter  a 
word  of  warning;  people  grow  like  the  thing 
they  worship,  and  the  first  thing  you  know  this 
town  will  be  full  of  'ITS'." ' 

What  shall  the  believing  do  about  it?  Dr. 
Stocker,  former  court  preacher  of  Berlin,  says, 
in  answer  to  this  question,  "The  critic's  denial  of 
practically  all  that  conservative  believers  regard 
as  the  very  foundation  of  Christianity,  such  as  the 
divine  inspiration  of  the  scriptures,  the  Trinity, 
the  atonement,  and  the  divinity  of  Christ,  virtually 
puts  them  outside  the  pale  of  the  historical,  evan- 
gelical church.  There  is  no  common  ground  be- 
tween the  old  and  the  new  schools  of  theology. 
It  is  time  to  decide  what  ought  to  be  done  in  the 
matter.  Evidently  the  best  course  would  b''  to 
separate  peacefully  the  liberals  from  the  protes- 
tant  churches.  Let  them  go  out  and  organize  and 
maintain  congregations  after  their  own  manner 
and  creed.     Some  of  the  churches  and  parishes 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM  67 

may  be  left  in  their  hands  as  honesty  and  justice 
demand ;  but  let  them  remain  no  longer  in  the 
church  whose  faith  they  do  not  share.  They  re- 
present no  type  of  Protestant  Christianity.  They 
are  the  teachers  of  a  new  religion."  This  would 
seem  to  be  the  only  course  open  that  retains  the 
semblance  of  ethical  conduct.  "Can  two  walk 
together  except  they  be  agreed  ?"  Dr.  P.  S.  Hen- 
son  says,  ''between  these  two  schools  there  is  the 
width  of  the  whole  heaven;"  and  Dr.  A.  H. 
Strong  says,  "we  seem  to  be  on  the  verge  of 
another  unitarian  defection."  Why  should  we 
not  part  in  peace  ? 

And  yet,  in  answer  to  this  kindly  proposition, 
Dr.  Rade,  says,  "We  moderns  will  risk  anything 
rather  than  leave  the  Church."  It  looks  a  little 
like  the  old  story  of  the  drunken  man  who  had 
made  his  way  homeward  to  the  point  of  the  lamp- 
post, to  which  he  affectionately  clung,  saying,  "to- 
gether we  stand ;  divided  I  fall."  And  yet  sad  as 
is  that  prospect,  Conservatives  must  even  insist 
upon  it ;  or  else  play  truant  to  the  text,  "If  any 
come  unto  you  and  bringeth  not  this  teaching, 
receive  him  not  into  your  house  and  give  him  no 
greeting,  for  he  that  giveth  him  greeting  partak- 
eth  in  his  evil  works." 

THE  END  OE  FRATERNITY. 

Christian  fraternity  is  not  merely  social.  If  it 
were.  Conservatives  and  Critics  could  adjust  their 


68  THE  FINAI^ITY  OF 

differences,  or  even  afford  to  forget  and  neglect 
them.  I  have  no  creed  to  which  my  neighbors 
must  subscribe  in  order  to  be  loved  as  neighbors ; 
no  doctrinal  standards  to  which  my  acquaintances 
must  come  before  I  call  them  friends.  That  is 
another  matter  altogether!  Among  the  Unitari- 
ans I  have  some  close  personal  friends;  and  so 
among  Universalists,  and  so  with  Christian  Sci- 
entists and  Dowieites!  But  our  fellowship  is 
social;  it  is  not  a  fellowship  of  faith.  The  ques- 
tion of  Christian  fraternity  is  not  necessarily 
involved. 

Christian  fraternity  is  not  even  ecclesiastical. 
It  is  well  known  that  men  may  be  members  of  the 
same  church  and  not  be  special  friends;  in  fact 
in  our  larger  churches  they  are  not  even  speaking 
acquaintances  in  all  instances.  Every  great  denom- 
ination has  its  thousands,  and  even  its  millions 
of  members  upon  whose  faces  the  most  widely 
traveled  brother  of  that  faith  has  never  looked. 
And,  of  the  few  he  does  know,  there  may  be  some 
who  belong  to  a  local  body  of  believers  with  him, 
and  yet  with  whom  he  refuses  to  fraternize.  So 
Christian  fraternity  is  not  a  question  of  ecclesias- 
tical relations. 

Fraternity  "in  Christ"  involves  "the  fellozvship 
of  a  common  faith."  Mark  you,  "The  fellowship 
of  a  common  faith."  Two  people  may  consent  to 
the  same  creed  and  yet  hate  each  other — they 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM  69 

are  without  the  "fellowship"  of  a  common  faith. 
Two  men  may  love  each  other,  the  one  be  a  Uni- 
tarian and  the  other  an  Evangelical ;  they  also  are 
without  the  fellowship  of  "a  common  faith ;"  and 
their  fraternity  is  not  the  fraternity  "in  Christ." 
When  Charles  Spurgeon  quit  the  Baptist  Un- 
ion of  England  he  did  not  do  it  because  he  hated 
all  the  brethren  of  the  Union,  but  because  he 
found  many  of  them  accepting  and  preaching 
"another  faith"  than  that  revealed  in  God's  Word. 
The  man  who  criticises  Spurgeon's  conduct  ought 
also  to  complain  of  John's  injunction  as  voiced  in 
this  text.  Truly,  as  one  has  said,  "It  is  not  for  us 
to  become  judges  of  motive;  or  to  defame  men 
simply  because  they  differ  from  us.  Neither  is 
it  for  us  to  contradict  the  inspired  record  of  the 
Word  of  God  when  it  declares  that  'certain  men 
became  vain  in  their  imaginations  and  their  fool- 
ish heart  was  darkened'  and  ''they  changed  the 
truth  of  God  into  a  lie,  and  worshipped  and  serv- 
ed the  creature  more  than  the  Creator,  who  is 
blessed  forever.' " 

Paul,  writing  to  Timothy,  warned  him  against 
those  "men  who,  concerning  the  truth  have  erred, 
saying  that  the  resurrection  is  passed  already," 
and  "overthrown  the  faith  of  some."  Peter  af- 
firmed there  will  be  "false  prophets  bringing  in 
privily  destructive  heresies,  denying  even  the 
Master  that  bought  them  ....  by  reason  of  whom 


yo  THE  FINALITY  OP 

the  way  of  truth  shall  be  evil  spoken  of."  John, 
in  his  first  epistle  said,  "Who  is  the  liar  but  he  that 
denieth  that  Jesus  is  Christ  ?  Whosoever  denieth 
the  Son  the  same  hath  not  the  Father."  In  his 
Second  Epistle,  he  calls  upon  us  to  reject  the  fel- 
lowship of  all  such.     (V.  9-10.) 

The  day  in  which  evangelical  Christianity  so 
far  compromises  with  critics  that  He  who  stilled 
the  tempest  by  the  word  of  his  power,  who  fed  the 
thousands  with  five  loaves  of  bread,  who  healed 
the  nobleman's  son,  who  raised  Jarius'  daughter 
from  the  dead,  who  restored  the  deaf,  the  blind, 
the  dumb  by  a  word,  who  cleansed  the  leper  by  a 
look,  is  no  longer  enthroned  in  our  faith  as  the 
Messiah  of  the  prophets — the  Son  of  God,  the 
Saviour  from  sin — the  light  that  has  shone  for 
millenniums  upon  the  paths  of  men  h  extinguish- 
ed and  the  world  is  doomed.  But  surrender  we 
will  not!  Our  Saviour  is  too  precious  to  be  be- 
trayed into  the  hands  of  His  enemies ;  the  Word 
of  God  is  too  glorious  to  be  flung  away  at  the 
behest  of  blind  leaders  ;  our  message  from  heaven 
is  too  sweet  to  our  sin-sick  souls  for  us  either  to 
reject  the  messengers  or  to  doubt  the  truth  they 
delivered  once  for  all. 


TUfe  HIGHER  CRITICISM  7I 


Chapter  IV. 

THE   THEORY  OF   EVOLUTION   AND 
FALSE  THEOLOGY. 

"In  the  beginning  God  created  the  heaven^s  and 
the  earth  ....  And  God,  said,  Let  the  waters 
under  the  heavens  be  gathered  together  unto  one 
place,  and  let  the  dry  land  appear,  and  it  was 

so And  God  said,  Let  the  earth  put  forth 

grass,  herbs  yielding  seed,  and  fruit-trees  bearing 
fruit  after  their  kind,  wherein  is  the  seed  thereof, 

upon  the  earth :  and  it  was  so And  God  said. 

Let  the  waters  swarm  with  swarms  of  living  crea- 
tures, and  let  birds  fly  above  the  earth  in  the  open 
firmament  of  heaven.  And  God  created  the  great 
sea-monsters,  and  every  living  creature  that  mov- 
eth,  wherewith  the  waters  swarmed,  after  their 
kind,  and  every  winged  bird  after  its  kind ;  and 

God  saw  that  it  was  good And  God  said. 

Let  the  earth  bring  forth  living  creatures  after 
their  kind,  cattle,  and  creeping  things,  and  beasts 

of  the  earth  after  their  kind :  and  it  was  so 

And  God  said,  Let  us  make  man  in  our  image, 
after  our  likeness  :  and  let  them  have  the  dominion 
over  the  fish  of  the  sea,  and  over  the  birds  of  the 


72  THE  FINALITY  OP 

heavens,  and  over  the  cattle,  and  over  all  the 
earth,  and  over  every  creeping  thing  that  creep- 
eth  upon  the  earth.  And  God  created  man  in  his 
own  image,  in  the  image  of  God  created  he  him ; 
male  and  female  created  he  them."  Gen.  i  :i,  9, 
II,  20-21,  24,  26-27. 

"By  faith  we  understand  that  the  worlds  have 
been  framed  by  the  word  of  God,  so  that  what  is 
seen  hath  not  been  made  out  of  things  which  ap- 
pear."   Heb.  1 1 :3. 

Our  theme  is  "The  Theory  of  Evolution 
and  False  Theology."  It  may  not  have  occurred 
to  all  that  the  theory  of  evolution  and  false  the- 
ology are  indissolubly  linked  together.  But  ev- 
ery scientist  understands,  as  do  also  intelligent 
teachers  of  the  Scriptures,  that  the  theory  of  ev- 
olution is  not  simply  a  question  of  the  origin  of 
species;  but,  in  its  present-day  application,  pro- 
poses to  account  for  everything  material,  from 
fire-mist  to  the  perfected  frame  of  the  universe; 
everything  animated,  from  the  sterilized  cell  of 
lowest  life  to  the  Man  of  Nazareth;  and  every- 
thing moral,  from  the  sensations  of  an  amoeba  to 
the  sacred  communion  between  God  and  man. 

When,  therefore,  a  biologist  says  that  the  min- 
ister has  nothing  to  do  with  the  theory  of  evolu- 
tion, he  reveals  either  his  ignorance  of  its  appli- 
cation, or  his  indisposition  to  be  disturbed  by  an 
adequate  argument.    When  a  professor  in  Natur- 


THE   HIGHER   CRITICISM  73 

a]  Science  says  that  people  who  are  not  constant 
students  of  his  specialty  should  not  pass  any 
judgment  upon  its  claims  and  contentions,  he 
disputes  the  right  of  decision  by  a  competent 
jury,  and  demands  that  the  public  close  its  eyes, 
that  it  may  the  more  readily  swallow  his  deliver- 
ances. 

It  may  be  necessary,  therefore,  for  the  man 
who  decides  to  think  for  himself,  and  even  main- 
tain his  right  to  judge  the  findings  of  so-called 
scientists,  to  "beg  pardon;"  but  this  formality 
performed,  we  pass  on  to  question,  compare,  and 
conclude  according  to  the  individual  judgment. 

Every  preacher  of  the  present  hour  is  com- 
pelled to  deal  with  the  theory  of  evolution,  and 
either  accept  it  or  reject  it.  Its  advocates  have 
invaded  his  realm.  Prof.  Metcalf,  biologist  of  the 
Woman's  College,  Baltimore,  in  his  book  "Organ- 
ic Evolution"  naively  tells  us  that  in  coming  to 
the  position  of  a  dignified  science  the  last  strong- 
hold to  be  taken  by  evolution  was  that  of  the 
supernaturalist,  "that  of  the  man  who  claims  that 
supernatural  agency  intervenes  in  nature  in  such 
a  way  as  to  modify  the  natural  law  of  events.'' 
This  opinion  he  thinks  Darwin  overthrew  and 
doomed.  (See  "Introduction  to  Organic  Evo- 
lution" p.  20). 


74  THE  FINALITY  OP 

Such  a  suggestion  simply  indicates  that  the 
entire  company  of  conservative  theologians  are  not 
only  unscientific,  but  are  mental  mossbacks,  cling- 
ing to  exploded  theories,  preaching  obsolete  opin- 
ions, and  practicing  doctrine  long  since  out  of 
date.  If,  therefore,  one  of  them  should  fail  to 
make  an  argument,  the  public  ought  not  to  be  sur- 
prised. On  the  other  hand,  if  he  should  succeed 
in  making  the  theory  of  evolution  look  doubtful, 
it  might  be  worth  while  for  the  public  to  examine 
carefully  the  foundations  of  this  much  boasted 
philosophy. 

At  the  risk  of  revealing  our  weakness  in  argu- 
ment, we  propose  three  statements  concerning  ev- 
olution. First,  The  Theory  is  Unscientific;  sec- 
ond, The  Theory  is  Unscriptural ;  third.  The  The* 
ory  is  Anti-Christian. 

THE  THEORY  IS  UNSCIENTIFIC. 

It  is  a  suggestion,  not  a  science.  The  prevail- 
ing opinion  that  evolution  is  a  modern  scientific 
discovery  is  false  alike  to  history  and  to  the  prop- 
er employment  of  speech.  On  the  authori- 
ty of  Wallace,  Lucretius,  who  lived  a  hundred 
years  before  Christ,  in  his  great  poem  on  "The 
Nature  of  Things"  expressed  the  major  part  of 
the  present-day  theory.  He  held  to  the  molecular 
belief,  that  the  molecules  did  not  come  into  actual 


THB    HIGHER    CRITICISM  75 

contact;  defined  atoms,  thought  that  they  were 
eternal;  while  admitting  the  existence  of  gods, 
he  refused  them  any  share  in  the  construction  of 
the  universe,  maintaining  that  it  had  come  by 
chance,  after  infinite  time,  by  random  motions  and 
collisions,  and  he  tried  to  account  for  the  introduc- 
tion of  sensation  into  atoms.  He  maintained  that 
earth  worms  came  by  spontaneous  generation,  and 
that  in  some  remote  period  of  the  world's  history, 
when  heat  and  moisture  abounded,  the  earth  was 
filled  with  wombs,  out  of  which  were  born  living 
things,  and  after  the  custom  of  many  a  present- 
day  biologist  he  contended  that  the  very  ground 
had  given  existence  alike  to  the  lowest  forms  of 
life,  to  every  beast  and  to  man. 

To  be  sure,  the  modern  apostles  of  this  faith — 
Huxley,  Darwin,  Spencer,  Wallace  and  others, 
have  found  for  it  more  attractive  phrases;  ar- 
gued it  on  the  ground  of  likelihood,  progression 
and  analogy;  but  not  one  of  these  ever  called  it 
a  science.  They  regarded  it  a  theory,  and  a  theory 
only.  It  is  not  unusual  for  the  smaller  followers 
of  great  minds  to  far  exceed  their  masters.  The 
leading  evolutionists  of  the  world  today  do  not 
speak  of  it  as  a  "science;"  they  retain  the  old 
term  of  Huxley,  Dai*  v'm,  and  Spencer — "theory." 
But  many  a  preacher  who  is  neither  a  specialist 
in  natural  history  nor  in  supernatural  revelation, 
finds  himself  involved  in  what  he  regards  "the 


'jd  THE  FINALITY  OP 

conflict  between  science  and  theology"  and  at- 
tempts the  reconciliation.  Since  the  path  by 
which  Science  has  traveled  is  strewn  with 
the  decaying  structures  of  discarded  theories, 
why  should  not  Andrew  White  withhold  his 
endeavor  until  specialists  in  biology,  geology 
and  paleontology  are  themselves  convinced  that 
evolution  is  something  more  than  a  theory? 

Several  times  in  recent  years  we  have  ques- 
tioned fairly  competent  exponents  of  this  theory 
as  to  whether  they  regarded  it  a  "science,"  to  be 
answered  in  almost  every  instance,  "Well,  it  is 
generally  adopted,  the  world  over,  as  a  working 
theory  for  scientific  investigation."  Now  the 
Standard  Dictionary  defines  "theory"  after  tins 
manner — "A  plan,  or  scheme  subsisting  in  the 
mind,  but  based  on  principles  variable  by  obser- 
vation ;  loosely  and  popularly,  mere  hypothesis  or 
speculation;  hence  an  individual  view."  "Sci- 
ence," on  the  contrary,  it  describes  as  "Knowl- 
edge gained  and  verified  by  exact  observation  and 
correct  thinking."  A  theory  may  be  scientific; 
but  to  make  it  such  one  must  produce  its  verifica- 
tion by  exact  observation  or  experiment,  where- 
upon it  is  no  longer  a  theory.  Neither  Huxley, 
Darwin  nor  Spencer  ever  maintained  that  they 
had  produced  such  verification  of  evolution ! 

But  we  go  a  step  farther.  The  theory  of  evo- 
lution is  unproven  and  unprovable.     Notwith- 


THE   HIGHER   CRITICISM  yj 

Standing  Darwin's  "Origin  of  Species,"  in  the 
form  of  a  book,  the  occurrence  of  a  new  species, 
either  by  natural  selection  or  human  cultivation, 
is  unknown.  By  cultivation  man  has  made  the  rose 
more  splendid  in  size,  more  beautiful  and  varie- 
gated in  color,  and  not  a  few  of  the  flowers  he 
has  even  doubled ;  but  no  man  has  yet  produced 
a  rose  from  the  seed  of  sunflower,  nor  from  the 
pink,  nor  from  anything  else  than  a  rose;  or 
even  been  able  to  make  a  grain  of  rye,  similar  as 
it  is  to  the  form  of  other  cereals,  bring  forth  oats 
or  wheat,  or  else  than  rye.  A  line  from  Genesis 
is  the  law  of  natural  history.  "Every  seed  after 
its  own  kind."  The  scientists  of  the  world  were 
never  so  anxious,  upon  any  single  point,  and 
never  wrought  so  assiduously  to  disprove  it,  as 
they  are  to  do  away  with  this  statement  of  Holy 
Scripture;  but  their  endeavors  to  overthrow  the 
Divine  fiat  have  signally  failed. 

When  a  biologist  who  believes  that  all  life, 
from  an  amoeba  to  a  Milton,  is  the  product  of 
evolution,  being  asked  if  such  a  thing  as  a  new 
species  by  natural  selection  is  known,  answers, 
"We  think  there  are  some  snails  in  the  Hawaiian 
Islands  that  hint  at  it,"  he  will  not  blame  us  if 
we  regard  his  investigations  a  little  "slow."  Or, 
if  he  afiirms  that  the  gill  slits  of  a  human  foetus 
prove  that  man  has  ascended  from  sea  life,  we 
answer,  "That  sounds  fishy."    If  he  point  to  the 


78  THE  FINALITY  OF 

mule  in  defense  of  his  doctrines,  we  remind  him 
of  its  sterility,  and  make  his  argument  asinine. 
Not  a  few  scientists  have  said,  concerning  the 
mule,  that  with  his  accustomed  stubbornness  he 
"blocks  the  way  of  the  evolution  theory."  But 
better  still  is  the  remark  of  Dr.  A.  J.  Frost  that 
"the  mule  is  the  endeavor  of  an  ass  to  evolute 
himself,  but  he  only  succeeds  in  making  a  bigger 
ass  of  himself." 

The  utter  desperation  to  which  evolutionists 
are  driven  in  their  desire  to  "demonstrate" — as 
the  Christian  Scientist  says — and  so  be  able  to 
switch  from  theory  to  science,  is  shown  in  their 
treatment  of  the  horse.  They  have  dug  out  of  the 
earth  a  little  animal  about  the  size  of  a  fox,  with 
five  toes,  which  has  some  similarity  to  the  horse, 
and  they  have  called  him — old  horse — eohippus; 
and  they  have  brought  up  another  with  three  toes, 
as  big  as  a  timber  wolf,  and  because  of  certain 
similarities  they  have  called  him  a  horse ;  and 
then  they  have  imagined  that  horse  finally  devel- 
oping into  the  present  beautiful  beast  of  domes- 
tic service,  with  one  toe  elongated  from  the  knee 
to  the  hoof;  and  in  certain  splints  on  the  side  of 
his  leg  they  find  the  aborted  ties.  The  intervening 
horses,  bridging  the  gap  between  these  ancient 
animals  and  our  black  beauty,  they  have  sought 
in  vain !  Yet  they  will  stand  before  you  and 
speak  with  all  the  assurance  of  men  who  had 


THE   HIGHER   CRITICISM  79 

found  the  last  missing  link,  concerning  the  evohi- 
tion  of  the  horse !  Why  do  they  begin  with  that 
little  fox-like  animal?  In  the  ocean  there  is  a 
shrimp  that  has  the  head  of  a  horse  and  his  mo- 
tions in  water  are  much  like  a  plunging  charger. 
Why  not  begin  with  him?  At  college  the  boys 
used  to  be  chargeable  with  having  ridden  a  pony, 
and  if  it  could  be  proven  it  was  worse  for  them 
when  they  came  into  the  professor's  presence. 
Once  a  cute  lad,  who  was  later  a  consul  in  one  of 
the  South  American  Republics,  bluntly  remarked 
in  the  presence  of  our  professor,  "I  had  a  pony 
last  season  that  thirteen  rode,  but  I  gave  him 
away  because  this  present  class  has  nineteen  big 
fellows  in  it,  and  I  thought  it-  would  be  an  out- 
rage for  us  all  to  straddle  the  little  fellow !"  But 
that  poor  pony  of  the  five  toes  has  been  straddled 
by  a  thousand  professors ;  they  have  ridden  the 
toes  off  him,  and  it  is  little  wonder  that  some  of 
their  students  have  gone  out  to  pity  the  pony  and 
regard  the  professors'  conduct  with  ridicule. 

Something  similar  has  occurred  in  the  attempt 
to  make  a  man  out  of  a  monkey.  They  found 
the  missing  link  once  in  "The  Calaveras  Skull." 
It  was  150  feet  below  surface.  There  could  be  no 
doubt  about  it!  But  when  Wm.  R.  C.  Scribner 
confessed  that  he  had  brought  it  into  me  mme 
as  a  practical  joke,  scientists  were  ashamed.  Dr. 
W.  J.  Sinclair's    discussion,    "Reeent  Investiga- 


80  THE  FINALITY  OF 

tions  Bearing  on  the  Question  of  the  Occurrence 
of  Neocene  Man  in  the  Auriferous  Gravels  of  the 
Sierra  Nevada"  confirms  Scribner's  claim,  and 
makes  it  perfectly  evident  that  Prof.  J.  D.  Whit- 
ney paraded  a  very  modern  skull  as  that  of  a  pre- 
historic man. 

They  found  the  missing  link  in  the  Neander- 
thal skeleton  in  Prussia,  and  proclaimed  it  three 
hundred  thousand  years  old ;  but  it  turned  out  to 
be  only  a  Cossack  killed  in  1814.  Columbia  College 
had  a  smart  professor  who  dug  out  of  Colorado's 
soil  a  skeleton.  It  was  heralded  as  of  remarka- 
ble antiquity,  and  the  friable  bones  were  being 
paraded  to  the  ends  of  the  earth  when  some  cow- 
boys complained  that  the  grave  of  their  pet  mon- 
key had  been  rifled.  I  was  taken  into  a  little 
pavilion  near  Manitou  and  was  shown  the  petri- 
fied (?)  body  of  a  remarkable  little  fat  fellow 
who  had  been  brought  up  from  the  bottom  of  the 
Colorado  River.  But  a  man  needed  not  to  be  a 
scientist,  to  discover  that  it  was  nothing  more  than 
a  figure  hewn  out  of  stone.  To  be  sure,  the 
greatest  ado  has  been  made  over  the  Pithecan- 
thropus Erectus.  It  consists  of  the  piece  of  a 
skull  and  leg  bone  and  two  teeth,  found  in  Java, 
in  1 89 1.  Dr.  Alexander  Patterson  says,  the  cubic 
measurement  of  that  skull  is  sixty  inches — the 
same  as  that  of  an  idiot.  These  specimens  were 
found  at  separate  places  and  times.     The  skull 


THB   HIGHER   CRITICISM  8l 

is  too  small  for  the  thigh  bone.  The  age  of  the 
strata  in  which  they  were  found  is  uncertain. 
Even  Haeckel  admits  that  the  belief  that  this 
is  the  missing  link  is  strongly  combated  by  some 
distinguished  scientists. 

The  earth  has  been  opened  at  a  thousand 
points;  the  sea  has  been  explored  to  its  bottom; 
biologists  have  had  access  to  the  very  bowels  of 
both  and  have  been  animated  by  one  determina- 
tion— the  discovery  of  the  missing  link — and  yet 
to  the  present  hour  they  have  utterly  failed  to 
produce  it !  We  fear  that  it  is  an  illustration  of 
what  the  Irishman  said.  He  attended  the  circus 
and  was  especially  interested  in  the  animals. 
When  they  brought  out  the  dromedary  he  ex- 
amined the  ungainly  beast  from  head  to  foot; 
felt  of  the  great  humps  to  see  whether  they  were 
artificial  or  actual  flesh.  Being  convinced  of  the 
latter,  he  said,  "Begory ;  they  ain't  no  sich  ani- 
mal !"  This  seems  to  be  the  truth  concerning 
the  missing  link.  It  is  one  thing  to  imagine  tFiat 
it  exists ;  it  is  another  to  make  the  demonstra- 
tions, and  science  demands  the  latter. 

Its  conclusions  are  without  premises.  What 
evidence  is  there  that  the  universe  began  in  fire 
mist?  What  evidence  is  there  that  life  originated 
out  of  death?  What  evidence  is  there  that  min- 
eral became  the  vegetable,  and  vegetable  became 
the  animal,  and  the  animal  became   the  man? 


82  THE  FINAUTY  OP 

What  proof  have  we  of  the  eternity  of  matter 
'  beyond  the  atheistic  desire  to  have  it  so?  And, 
if  these  premises  are  false  how  can  conclusions 
resting  upon  them  be  true?  If  within  the  knowl- 
edge of  man  the  reptile  has  never  become  a  bird, 
a  fish  has  never  become  a  mammal,  a  monkey  has 
never  become  a  man;  if  the  depths  of  the  earth 
and  the  sounding  of  the  seas  refuse  to  deliver  up 
a  single  instance  of  such  a  metamorphosis,  what 
are  the  premises  of  this  argument?  It  may  be 
very  convenient  to  push  your  claims  back  to  the 
time  where  the  knowledge  of  man  utterly  fails, 
but  do  not  do  violence  to  the  splendid  attainments 
of  human  speech  by  calling  such  conduct  "sci- 
entific." I  may  have  no  right  to  object  to  Mr. 
Darwin's  believing  that  "man  is  descended  from  a 
hairy  quadruped,  furnished  with  a  tail,  and 
pointed  ears ;  probably  arboreal  in  its  habits,  and 
an  inhabitant  of  the  Old  World,"  but  I  can  not 
be  denied  the  right  to  ask  him  to  produce  some 
evidence  of  his  assertion.  Dr.  Eldridge,  of  the 
British  Museum,  declares  that  that  institution  is 
filled  with  specimens,  every  one  of  which  dis- 
proves the  evolution  theory.  Dr.  Joseph  Clark, 
after  spending  twenty-nine  years  in  the  heart  of 
Africa,  says:  "I  find  no  evidence  of  evolution 
in  Africa,  but  positive  proofs  to  the  contrary." 


THE   HIGHER   CRITICISM  83 

THE  THEORY  IS  UNSCRIPTURAL. 

The  Word  nowhere  warrants  it.  There  are 
brethren  in  the  pulpit  who  have  a  new  way  of  in- 
terpreting the  first  chapter  of  Genesis,  which,  by 
the  way,  one  of  my  fellow-laborers  has  translated 
after  the  following  manner: 

1.  Primarily  the  unknowable  moved  upon 
cosmos  and  evolved  protoplasm. 

2.  And,  protoplasm  was  inorganic  and  undif- 
ferentiated; containing  all  things  in  potential  en- 
ergy; and  a  spirit  of  evolution  moved  upon  the 
fluid  mass. 

3.  And  the  Unknowable  said,  Let  atoms  at- 
tract ;  and  their  contact  begat  light,  heat  and  elec- 
tricity. 

4.  And  the  Unconditioned  differentiated  the 
atoms  each  after  its  kind;  and  their  combination 
begat  rock,  air  and  water. 

5.  And  there  went  out  a  spirit  of  Evolution 
from  the  Unconditioned,  and  working  in  proto- 
plasm by  accretion  and  absorption  produced  the 
organic  cell. 

6.  And  cell  by  nutrition  evolved  primordial 
germ,  and  germ  developed  protogene ;  and  proto- 
gene  begat  eozoon,  and  eozoon  begat  monad,  and 
monad  begat  animalculse. 


84  THE  FINALITY  OF 

7.  And  animalculae  begat  ephemra:  then  be- 
gan creeping  things  to  multiply  on  the  face  of 
the  earth. 

8.  And  earthly  atom  in  protoplasm  begat 
molecule,  and  thence  came  grass  and  every  herb 
of  the  earth. 

9.  And  animalculae  in  the  water  evolved  fins, 
tails,  claws  and  scales;  and  in  the  air  wings  and 
beaks :  and  on  the  land  they  sprouted  such  organs 
as  were  necessary  as  played  upon  by  the  environ- 
ment. 

10.  And  by  accretion  and  absorption,  came 
the  radiata  and  mollusca,  and  moUusca  begat 
articulata,  and  articulata  begat  vertebrate. 

11.  Now  these  are  the  generations  of  the 
higher  vertebrata  in  the  cosmic  period  that  the 
Unknowable  evoluted  the  biped  mammalia: 

12.  And  every  man  of  the  earth,  while  he  was 
yet  a  monkey,  and  the  horse,  while  he  was  yet 
the  hipparion,  and  the  hipparion  before  he  was 
an  oredon.  Out  of  the  ascidian  came  the  amphi- 
bian and  begat  the  pentadactyle,  and  by  inherit- 
ance and  selection,  produced  the  hylobate,  from 
which  are  the  simiade  in  all  their  tribes. 

13.  And  out  of  the  simiade  the  lemur  pre- 
vailed above  his  fellow  and  produced  the  platy- 
rhine  monkey. 


THE    HIGHKR    CRITICISM  85 

14.  And  the  plytyrhine  begat  the  catarrhine, 
and  the  catarrhine  begat  the  anthropoid  ape  and 
the  ape  begat  the  longimanous  orang,  and  the 
orang  begat  the  chimpanzee,  and  the  chimpanzee 
evolved  the  what-is-it? 

15.  And  the  what-is-it?  went  into  the  land  of 
Nod,  and  took  him  a  wife  of  the  longimanous 
gibbons. 

16.  And  in  the  process  of  the  cosmic  period 
were  born  unto  them  their  children  the  anthro- 
morphic  premordial  types. 

17.  The  homunculus  the  prognathus;  the  tro- 
glodyte, and  the  autochthon,  the  terragon, — these 
are  the  generations  of  primeval  man. 

18.  And  primeval  man  was  naked  and  not 
ashamed,  but  lived  in  quadrumanous  innocence, 
and  struggled  mightily  to  harmonize  with  the 
environment. 

19.  And  by  inheritance  and  natural  selection 
did  he  progress  from  the  stable  and  homogeneous 
to  the  complex  and  the  heterogeneous;  for  the 
weakest  died,  and  the  strongest  grew  and  mul- 
tiplied. 

20.  And  man  grew  a  thumb  for  that  he  had 
need  of,  and  developed  capacities  for  prey. 

31.  For  behold,  the  swiftest  animals  got 
away  from  the  slow  men,  wherefore  the  slow 
animals  were  eaten  and  the  slow  men  starved 
to  death. 


86  THE  FINALITY  OF 

22.  And  as  the  types  differentiated  the  weaker 
types  continually  disappeared. 

23.  And  the  earth  was  filled  with  violence; 
for  man  strove  with  man,  and  tribe  with  tribe, 
whereby  they  killed  off  the  weak  and  foolish 
and  secured  "the  survival  of  the  fittest." 

Moses  again  appeals  to  the  public,  "Choose 
you  this  day  which  you  will  have" — what  the 
Spirit  saith,  or  what  the  self-styled  Scientist  as- 
serteth ! 

At  many  points  evolution  is  anti-scriptural. 
The  majority  of  evolutionists,  certainly  the  most 
able  ones  among  them,  contend  for  the  eternity 
of  matter.  The  Scriptures  assert  the  opposite. 
"By  faith  we  understand  that  the  worlds  have 
been  framed  by  the  Word  of  God,  so  that  which 
is  seen  hath  not  been  made  out  of  things  which 
appeared."    (Heb.  11:3). 

Almost  to  a  man,  evolutionists  contend  that 
species  are  the  product  of  natural  selection.  Ten 
times  in  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis  the  law 
"after  its  own  kind"  is  declared,  and  it  covers 
every  form  of  life,  from  the  blade  of  grass  to  the 
god-like  occupants  of  Eden.  It  is  little  wonder, 
therefore,  that  when  such  men  as  Crawford  H. 
Toy,  George  Burnam  Foster,  B.  Fay  Mills,  and 
R.  J.  Campbell  adopt  the  evolution  theory  in  to- 
to,  that  they  immediately  begin  to  treat  the  Word 
of   God   as   though   it   were   without   authority. 


THE    HIGHER    CRITICISM  87 

And  it  is  hardly  to  be  wondered  at  that  Prof. 
Haeckel,  the  most  noted  evolutionist,  should  pro- 
ceed, in  his  "Riddles  of  the  Universe"  to  read 
God  out  of  it  altogether.  However,  there  is  one 
thing  to  be  said  in  favor  of  these  men.  They 
are  intelligent  enough  to  see  the  inharmony  be- 
tween the  Scriptures  and  this  present-day  pop- 
ular theory;  and  honest  enough  to  say,  "We  pre- 
fer evolution  to  the  Book."  It  is  easier  to  hold 
such  men  in  esteem  than  it  is  to  respect  those 
who  go  up  and  down  the  land  telling  us  that  evo- 
lution is  true,  and  so  is  the  Bible.  Such  teachers 
seem  to  belong  with  the  boy  Dr.  John  Henry 
Barrows  is  reported  to  have  met  in  India.  "A 
native  lad  had  attended  the  Christian  schools  and 
learned  there  the  shape  and  situation  of  the 
earth,  but  in  his  Hindoo  home  he  had  been  taught 
the  Hindoo  cosmogony,  namely,  that  the  earth 
was  circled  by  salt  water,  and  that  by  a  circle  of 
earth,  and  these  by  successive  circles  of  sweet 
cane  juice  and  other  soft  drinks,  with  intervening 
circles  of  land.  Dr.  Barrows  asked  the  boy  which 
belief  he  would  hereafter  hold?  He  replied  that 
he  "would  believe  both." 


THE  THEORY  AND  FALSE  THEOLOGY. 

The   intimate    relation   between   this   theory 
and  theology  is  becoming  more  and  more  appar- 


88  THU  FINAUTY  OF 

ent.  It  is  doubtful  if  there  is  a  single  skeptical 
professor  in  the  Old  World  or  the  New,  who  is 
not  also  a  fairly  full-fledged  evolutionist.  The 
theological  result  is  perfectly  evident  in  such 
books  as  "The  Finality  of  the  Christian  Religion" 
and  the  "New  Theology." 

According  to  evolutionists,  God  is  a  force, 
and  those  ministers  who  have  accepted  the  evolu- 
tionary theory  of  the  natural  universe,  have  lost 
their  personal  heavenly  Father  in  consequence. 
The  shibboleth  of  such  professed  Christian 
preachers  is  one  with  that  of  the  atheistic  philoso- 
phers when  they  have  found  a  common  view-point 
in  evolution.  It  is  a  remarkable  fact  to  find  Dan- 
iel, when  he  comes  to  describe  the  coming  Prince 
who  shall  oppose  God,  and  magnify  himself  be- 
yond all,  literally  saying,  "But  in  his  estate  he 
shall  honor  the  god  of  force."  (Dan.  11:38). 
Are  our  Critics  the  forerunners  of  the  anti- 
Christ? 

Evolution  makes  Christ  only  a  remarkable 
fnan.  One  calls  Him  "the  only  man;"  another 
believes  that  he  was  the  "mental  product  of  ex- 
cessive admiration."  "The  Flower  of  the  Race" 
is  so  beautiful  an  expression,  that  quite  a  few  of 
them  agree  in  its  adoption.  But,  whatever  the 
expression,  essential  deity  is  never  intended,  and 
to  admit  that  He  was  begotten  by  the  Holy 
Ghost   would   introduce   supernaturalism,   which 


THE    HIGHER   CRITICISM  89 

they  repudiate.  Foster's  astonishment  that 
"Belief  in  the  virgin  birth  of  Jesus  should  ever 
have  been  held  as  a  cardinal  article  of  the  Chris- 
tian faith"  is  shared  by  a  majority  of  the  Huxley- 
ites. 

His  resurrection  from  the  dead  is  either  de- 
nied outright  or  else  explained  away  by  affirming 
that  it  was  not  physical.  His  promise  to  come 
again  at  the  end  of  the  Age  and  introduce  a  mil- 
lenium  wherein  He  himself  shall  "reign  from  sea 
to  sea  and  from  the  rivers  to  the  ends  of  the 
earth"  they  repudiate  to  a  man,  and  so  fulfill  the 
prediction  of  Peter,  "In  the  last  days  mockers 
shall  come  with  mockery,  walking  after  their  own, 
lusts,  and  saying.  Where  is  the  promise  of  his 
coming;  for  from  the  day  that  the  fathers  fell 
asleep  all  things  continue  as  they  were  from  the 
beginning  of  creation." 

This  theory  makes  sin  essentially  a  virtue. 
Man  is  not  a  fallen  creature.  One  of  their  best 
exponents,  a  good  representative  of  a  great  uni- 
versity, recently  affirmed  in  my  presence  that  "to 
tell  children  they  were  not  by  nature  children  of 
God,  was  irrational ;  to  instruct  them  that  the 
essential  thing  was  the  evolution  of  the  life 
within  them,  was  sanity."  To  such  teachers 
"sin"  is  not  "a  transgression  of  the  law  of  God," 
but  simply  false  strokes  in  the  struggle  to  be  free 
from  self-limitations  and  opposing  environments. 


90  THE   FINAUTY  OP 

While  compelled  to  admit  that  a  crab-apple  will 
never  produce  pippins  unless  the  latter  be  grafted 
in,  they  yet  insist  that  the  child  which  the  Scrip- 
tures declares  is  "conceived  in  sin  and  shapen  in 
iniquity"  can  become  a  saint  without  "the  grafting 
in"  of  the  new  nature,  or  the  regenerating  work  of 
the  Holy  Ghost.  To  them,  Paul's  description  of 
sin  as  "exceedingly  sinful,"  is  without  justifica- 
tion, and  the  prophet's  statement  "The  soul  that 
sinneth  it  shall  die"  should  be  changed  to  "The 
soul  that  sinneth  is  searching  after  life." 

To  be  sure  some  of  the  greater  minds  among 
them  do  not  go  to  these  lengths.  Henry  Drum- 
mond  held  to  the  necessity  of  the  new  birth,  but 
for  that  matter,  Drummond's  "Natural  Law  in 
the  Spiritual  World"  is  the  very  antithesis  of  the 
full-fledged  evolution  theory. 

The  resurrection  is  even  more  offensive  to  ev- 
olutionists, than  is  regeneration.  It  just  as  cer- 
tainly introduces  the  supernatural,  and  it  brings 
the  work  of  the  Spirit  before  the  natural  vision 
where  men  can  see  and  judge  for  themselves. 
His  appearance  to  "above  five  hundred  brethren 
at  once"  (i.  Cor.  15:6)  is  boldly  disputed,  and 
the  explanation  of  their  testimony  is  found  in  the 
fervor  with  which  these  deluded  disciples  loved 
their  leader. 

//  makes  the  cross  only  a  criminal  mistake. 
From  their  view-point  it  was  not  according  to 


THE    HIGHER   CRITICISM  9! 

prophecy,  nor  did  it  in  any  wise  profit  the  race. 
It  was  only  a  notable  one  among  the  many  in- 
stances where  men,  actuated  by  human  hatred 
and  selfishness,  have  ignorantly  slain  their  friend. 
As  a  rule,  they  scoff  the  notion  that  "He  bore 
our  sins  on  the  tree,"  and  will  have  none  of  the 
teaching  that  "by  the  shedding  of  His  blood"  we 
have  secured  our  "remission."  Christ  crucified, 
is  unto  these,  as  to  the  Jews  of  old,  "a  stumbling 
block ;"  and  as  unto  the  Gentiles  of  former  times, 
"foolishness." 

To  them  redemption  is  a  misleading  term. 
The  thought  of  God  buying  back,  with  His  pre- 
cious blood,  that  which  man  had  forfeited  to  the 
Adversary  is  little  better  than  a  jest.  "Salvation 
must  be  by  self-development!"  they  insist.  Paul, 
when  he  dares  to  say,  "By  grace  are  ye  saved, 
through  faith,  and  that  not  of  yourselves,"  is 
simply  mistaken. 

What  then,  is  the  conclusion  of  the  whole 
matter?  Some  writer  has  summed  it  up  after 
this  manner:  "A  pantheistic  god,  instead  of  a 
personal  God.  A  human  savior  instead  of  a  di- 
vine Savior.  Infallible  scholarship  instead  of  an 
infallible  Bible.  Reformation  instead  of  regener- 
ation. Culture  instead  of  conversion.  The  nat- 
ural in  all  things,  the  supernatural  in  nothing." 
These  are  the  result  of  modern  scholarship !  Cer- 
tainly, as  Dr.  A.  H.  Strong,  of  Rochester  Semi- 


92  THE  FINALITY  OF 

nary,  says:  "We  need  a  new  vision  of 
the  Savior  to  convince  us  that  Jesus  is 
lifted  above  space  and  time,  that  His  existence 
antedated  creation,  that  He  conducted  the  march 
of  Hebrew  history,  that  He  was  born  of  a  virgin, 
suffered  on  the  cross,  rose  from  the  dead,  and 
now  lives  forever  more,  the  Lord  of  the  universe, 
the  only  God  with  whom  we  have  to  do,  our  Sa- 
vior here  and  our  Judge  hereafter.  Without  a 
revival  of  this  faith  our  churches  become  secular- 
ized, mission  enterprise  will  die  out  and  the  can- 
dlestick will  be  removed  out  of  its  place,  as  it  was 
in  the  seven  churches  of  Asia,  and  as  it  has  been 
with  the  apostate  churches  of  New  England." 


THE    HIGHER   CRITICISM  93 


Chapter  V. 

ARE  THE  SACRED  SCRIPTURES 
UNSCIENTIFIC? 

"Thy  word  is  true  from  the  beginning."  (Ps. 
119:160.)  This  is  an  expression  of  the  Psalm- 
ist that  must  be  explained  away  before  one  can 
pit  Science  and  the  Sacred  Scriptures  against 
each  other.  Since  the  purpose  of  preaching  is 
interpretation  of  the  Word,  rather  than  its  anni- 
hilation, we  shall  not  attempt  either  to  dispute  the 
veracity  of  this  statement  or  to  spiritualize  it  into 
some  strange  and  unnatural  explanation.  Ar- 
thur Pierson  thinks  the  Psalmist  meant  to  say 
that  from  the  first  word  the  Sacred  Scriptures 
are  true. 

But  the  modern  method  of  study  objects  to 
any  assumption.  It  insists  that  every  theme  and 
thing  shall  be  subjected  to  whatever  tests  are 
essential  in  the  establishment  of  its  claims.  To 
this,  intelligent  believers  take  no  exception.  If 
the  Bible  will  not  bear  investigation;  if  scrutiny 
discloses  shortcomings;  if  research  disproves  its 
assertions ;  if  true  Science  discredits  its  clear 
claims,  let  it  fall.     We  could  forfeit  it  without  a 


94  THE  FINALITY  OF 

tear;  join  in  digging  its  grave  without  regret, 
and  return  to  the  duties  of  life  smitten  by  no  se- 
rious bereavement. 

True,  it  is  serious  business  to  discredit  a  book 
which  has  accomplished  for  the  world  what  the 
Bible  has  wrought;  but  it  would  be  more  serious 
to  believe  a  lie,  or  even  to  accept  an  irresponsible 
chart  in  making  one's  way  over  the  sea  of  life. 
True,  the  Bible  "was  not  written  to  show  how 
the  heavens  go;"  but  rather  "how  to  go  to 
heaven ;"  it  is  not  a  text  book  on  science,  but  a 
guide-book  for  godly  living.  And  yet,  when  it 
addresses  itself  at  all  to  a  subject  of  scientific 
concern,  it  should  speak  the  truth,  if  it  makes 
the  claim  of  inspiration !  When  we  study  the 
words  of  men,  however  wise  they  may  be,  we  ex- 
pect to  come  upon  mistake.  When  we  read,  and 
properly  understand,  what  "God  hath  spoken" 
we  anticipate  no  such  results.  "Let  God  be 
found  true;  but  every  man  a  liar."  "He  that 
believeth  not  God  hath  made  him  a  liar." 

"But,"  we  are  told,  "God  has  two  books. 
One  we  call  'Nature,'  the  other  'Revelation;' 
that  He  is  just  as  certainly  the  author  of  the 
former  as  of  the  latter;  that  one  is  the  work  of 
His  hands  and  the  other  the  fruit  of  His  lips." 
What  Jesus,  when  once  he  stooped  down  and 
wrote  in  the  sand,  expressed,  we  do  not  know. 
But  can  any  man  imagine  that  His  writings  in 


THE    HIGHER   CRITICISM  95 

the  sand  were  out  of  harmony  with  His  spoken 
addresses,  and  is  it  possible  that  an  all-wise  God 
has  produced  in  Nature  and  in  Revelation  con- 
tradictory volumes? 

We  have  no  fear  whatever  that  the  Scrip- 
tures must  be  maintained  at  the  expense  of 
Science;  and  we  are  equally  persuaded  that  true 
Science  will  never  be  established  at  the  cost  of 
Scripture.  The  thing  to  be  feared  is,  that  the  dust 
of  false  reasoning  (of  which  the  air  is  full  today) 
will  get  into  the  eyes  of  men,  and  make  it  im- 
possible for  one  to  read  from  the  Sacred  Page, 
and  for  another  to  see  the  meaning  of  the  open 
book  of  Nature ;  and  so  for  either,  to  discern  the 
perfect  agreement  between  God's  Word  and 
God's  Work. 

First  or  all,  then,  let  us  give 

THE  DEFINITION  OE  THE  TERMS  INVOLVED. 

What  is  Science f  Can  we  improve  upon 
the  Standard  Dictionary's  statement — "Knowl- 
edge gained  and  verified  by  exact  observation  and 
correct  thinking ;  especially  as  methodically  form- 
ulated and  arranged  in  a  rational  system?" 
That  definition  takes  you  at  once  out  of  the  realm 
of  speculation.  It  disposes  of  such  terms  as 
"theory"  and  "hypothesis,"  making  them  possible 
servants  of  Science,  but  never  its  synonym.     It 


96  THE  FINAI^ITY  OF 

is  everywhere  admitted  that  almost  every  asser- 
tion made  in  the  name  of  Science  a  hundred 
years  since,  is  now  out  of  date;  and  while  this 
clearly  demonstrates  our  progress,  it  also  sug- 
gests that  we  are  still  in  the  hypothetical  and 
theoretical  stage.  No  one  would  dispute  that 
Sir  Isaac  Newton  was  somewhat  of  a  scientist, 
nor  yet  that  Tyndall  was  equally  worthy  the 
name,  and  yet  when  they  take  exactly  opposite 
positions  concerning  the  refraction  of  light,  both 
may  be  wrong,  but  both  cannot  be  right.  Hux- 
ley and  Darwin  are  names  that  somehow  sit 
easily  together  in  the  same  sentence,  and  yet 
these  men,  working  in  almost  the  same  realm, 
are  not  always  in  agreement.  The  ex- 
planation is  easy — "the  verification  of  knowl- 
edge by  exact  observation  and  correct  thinking" 
is  the  highest  accomplishment  of  which  the  hu- 
man mind  is  capable,  and  not  every  man  who 
cries  "Eureka"  has  found  it.  This  is  not  to  in- 
veigh against  the  sincerity  of  investigators,  nor 
even  to  deride  their  conclusions,  but  only  to  call 
attention  to  the  most  patent  fact  of  their  expe- 
rience! "Knowledge  gained  and  verified  by  ex- 
act observation  and  correct  thinking"  will  nev^r 
be  overthrown  by  mortal  men,  nor  yet  by  God. 
God  would  dethrone  Himself  by  such  an  en- 
deavor ! 


THE    HIGHER   CRITICISM  97 

What  is  Scripture f  Paul  defines  "all  Scrip- 
ture" as  that  which  is  "Cxod-breathed,"  and  the 
process  of  it  is  "that  holy  men  of  old  spake  as 
they  were  moved  (or  borne  along)  by  the  Holy 
Ghost!"  Knowing  himself  to  be  of  that  com- 
pany, Paul  affirms,  "We  speak  not  in  words 
which  man's  wisdom  teacheth,  but  which  the 
Spirit  teacheth;  combining  spiritual  things  with 
spiritual  words."  If  one  runs  through  the  Old 
Testament  he  will  find  God  everywhere  assum- 
ing the  Authorship  of  the  Sacred  Scriptures. 
The  phrases  are  like  these:  "The  Lord  spake 
unto  Moses  saying,  etc."  "These  are  the  words 
of  the  covenant  which  the  Lord  commanded 
Moses  to  make  with  the  children  of  Israel." 
"The  Lord  spake  unto  Joshua."  "The  words 
of  the  commandment  of  the  Lord."  Not 
scores,  but  hundreds  of  times,  does  God 
claim  to  be  the  Author  both  of  thought  and  lan- 
guage in  the  Holy  Book.  David  declares,  "The 
Spirit  of  the  Lord  spake  by  me,  and  his  word 
was  in  my  tongue."  (2  Samuel  23:2.)  To  me  it 
is  the  most  remarkable  evidence  of  the  skepti- 
cism of  the  age  that  because  there  are  some  diffi- 
culties in  the  theory  of  Verbal  Inspiration  men 
are  willing  to  throw  it  away,  and  adopt  such  no- 
tions as  are  now  current,  to  the  effect  that  God 
simply  stimulated  the  thought,  but  did  not  deter- 
mine the  speech ;  that  some  parts  of  the  Bible  are 


98  THE  FINALITY   OF 

literally  true,  and  others  are  only  allegory;  that 
some  are  fact,  others  only  fiction ;  that  some  are 
to  be  treated  with  credence  and  others  with  criti- 
cism; that  all  must  come  to  the  test  of  one's 
"inner  consciousness,"  and  at  that  court  be  either 
accepted  or  rejected. 

The  same  men  who  so  define  "Inspiration"  or 
"Illumination"  or  whatever  it  is,  would  go  into 
court  tomorrow  to  insist  upon  the  settlement  ot 
an  estate,  in  which  they  were  named  as  heirs, 
on  a  verbal  basis.  They  would  call  the  attention 
of  attorneys  and  judge  to  what  was  "written," 
and  unless  they  had  some  unrighteous  end  to  be 
conserved,  they  would  permit  no  departure  from 
the  very  words  in  which  the  testator  had  ex- 
pressed himself..  It  is  little  wonder,  therefore, 
that  the  New  Testament  writers,  who  may  be 
conceded  to  have  known  what  the  Scriptures 
were,  refer  to  the  Old  Testament  more  than 
eighty  times,  as  that  "which  is  written."  Never 
once  did  they  abandon  the  literal  interpretation  of 
the  same. 

If  the  words  of  the  Old  Testament 
were  "the  words  of  God,"  perhaps  no  believer, 
at  least,  will  dispute  that  the  New  Testament 
stands  upon  the  same  level.  And  so  the  Bible 
does  not  "contain  the  Scriptures ;"  the  Bible  is  the 
Scriptures, — God's  revealed  Word,  which  can 
hardly  have  been  given  to  men    with  less  care 


THU  highe;r  criticism  99 

than  any  intelligent,  faithful  father  would  show 
in  framing  the  article  that  bequeathed  his  pos- 
^ sessions  to  his  children.  If,  in  civil  courts,  the 
lightest  word  of  the  testator  is  the  weightiest 
law,  who  will  dare  to  treat  with  contempt, 
thought  or  phrase  found  in  the  Divine  Will? 

Mark  you,  there  is  a  decided  difference  be- 
tween the  plain  statement  of  the  Sacred  Scrip- 
tures and  some  absurd  opinion.  It  may  be,  that 
in  the  centuries  of  the  past  an  uninstructed  Chris- 
tian conceived  the  world  as  having  a  flat  surface, 
the  sky  as  a  roof  and  the  stars  as  holes 
through  the  same.  Kepler,  who  was  something 
of  a  scientist,  once  expressed  the  conviction  that 
the  world  was  a  living  animal.  Is  that  assertion 
to  be  confounded  with  Science?  Fanciful  inter- 
pretations in  the  one  realm  are  just  as  common 
as  in  the  other ;  and  they  neither  prove  nor  dis- 
prove anything.  I  do  not  have  to  harmonize  the 
Scriptures  with  the  absurd  statements  of  every 
man  who  may  speak  in  the  name  of  Science ;  and 
I  do  not  have  to  harmonize  Science  with  the  as- 
sertions of  every  man  who  may  mistakenly  appeal 
to  Moses,  or  even  to  Christ.  Science  is  God's 
voice  in  Nature ;  the  Scriptures  are  God's  voice  in 
grace,  and  it  does  not  fall  to  the  lot  of  any  mor- 
tal man  to  harmonize  them ;  the  harmony  is  in 
Him.     He  cannot  contradict  Himself! 


ICX)  THE  FINALITY  OF 

To  say  the  least,  it  is  a  strange  procedure 
when  a  man  proclaims  as  his  theme  "The  Har- 
mony between  Science  and  Scripture"  and  then 
shows  how  that  comes  to  pass  by  just  quietly 
disposing  of  the  latter;  by  saying,  for  instance, 
that  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis  is  "the  best  that 
Moses  knew, — the  impression  of  that  early  age, 
but  a  mistake  none  the  less."  Is  that  harmony? 
Is  it  not  rather,  annihilation?  It  may  let  you 
out  of  your  difficulty,  but  you  escape  at  the  ex- 
pense of  inspiration;  and  to  the  unspeakable  loss 
of  the  people.  There  used  to  be  an  eccentric 
preacher  in  Kentucky  well-known  to  the  author. 
He  did  no  great  amount  of  study,  and  yet  he 
commonly  preached  with  unction.  One  day  he 
found  himself  before  an  audience  with  no  unction 
on  hand ;  even  thoughts  refused  to  come.  He 
floundered  through  a  few  ill-formed  sentences, 
and  then,  squarely  facing  his  audience,  he  said, 
"Brethren  and  sisters,  you  think  I  have  gotten 
into  the  brush,  and  can't  get  out,  don't  you? 
Well,  I'll  show  you ;  we'll  just  look  to  the  Lord 
and  be  dismissed."  But  let  it  be  understood  that 
when  you  dismiss  the  claims  of  the  Sacred  Book, 
and  walk  out  of  your  difficulties,  you  have  lost 
the  divine  message  and  left  the  hungry  multi- 
tudes unsatisfied. 


'iiiii  highi;r  criticism.  ioi 

GlJNESIS  IN  SCIENCE  AND  SCRIPTURE. 

It  will  scarcely  be  disputed  that  so  far  as  men 
have  seen  any  inharmony  between  the  Sacred 
Scriptures  and  Science,  the  first  chapter  of  Gene- 
sis has  been  made  the  storm  center.  On  that  ac- 
count I  invite  your  athtention  to  this  part  of  the 
Word,  and  dare  the  assertion  that  its  careful 
study,  instead  of  demonstrating  the  inharmony 
between  Science  and  Scripture,  will  reveal  the 
most  undreamed  of  agreement  in  these  great 
books  of  God. 

First  of  all,  think  of  the  argument  from  fifteen 
facts  in  order. 

First  fact,  in  order, — God  created  the  heavens. 
Second  fact,  in  order — "and  the  earth ;" 
third — water ;  fourth — light ;  fifth — firmament ; 
sixth — grass ;  seventh — herb ;  eighth  —  tree ; 
ninth — appearance  of  heavenly  bodies;  tenth — 
fish ;  eleventh — moving  things ;  twelfth — fowls ; 
thirteenth — creeping  things ;  fourteenth — cattle ; 
fifteenth — man. 

Now,  the  latest  science  will  consent  to  this  or- 
der of  creation.  The  heavens  were  certainly  made 
first ;  the  earth  certainly  came  second ;  water  cer- 
tainly appeared  third,  light — fourth ;  firmament^ 
next;  grass  thereafter;  the  manifestation  of  sun 
and  moon — ninth ;  the  appearance  of  fish — tenth ; 
moving  things — eleventh ;  fowls — twelfth ;  creep- 


I02  THE  FINALITY  OF 

ing  things — thirteenth;  cattle,  etc.,  fourteenth, 
and  last,  man. 

Other  writers  have  called  attention  to  the  un- 
speakable significance  of  this  order  when  consid- 
ered before  the  law  of  permutation.  The  Stand- 
ard Dictionary  says,  "The  number  of  permu- 
tations of  any  given  number  of  things,  taken  all 
at  a  time,  is  equal  to  the  product  of  the  natural 
numbers  from  one  up  to  the  number  given,  inclu- 
sive." 

Now  if  Moses  only  spake  the  science  of  Iiis 
times,  he  knew  practically  nothing  of  the  order 
of  creation.  Consequently  he  must  guess  at  it. 
He  must  guess  whether  the  heavens  or  the  earth 
were  first  formed.  In  his  day  no  man  imagined 
that  the  heavenly  bodies  were  bigger  than  the 
earth,  and  all  men  supposed  that  they  moved 
about  it.  How  then  does  it  happen  that  Moses, 
when  he  came  to  guess  which  was  first  formed, 
the  heavens  or  the  earth,  mentioned  the  heavens 
in  the  primary  place?  You  say,  "Well  it  was  an 
easy  accident,  since  there  was  only  one  other  alter- 
native." Did  you  ever  hear  the  story  of  the  Irish- 
man who,  meeting  a  neighbor  said,  "We  have  a 
fine  baby  at  our  house  this  marning;  guiss 
whither  it  is  a  boy  or  a  gurl  ?"  "A  girl,"  said  the 
neighbor."  "No,  Sir,  guiss  agin."  "Well,  I 
say  a  boy !"    "Well,  neow,  who  tole  you  ?"    To  be 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  lOJ 

sure  Moses  had  one  chance  out  of  two  on  this 
arrangement.    But  he  got  it  right ! 

Third  fact — the  appearance  of  water.  Here 
Moses'  task  was  not  so  easy,  for  it  was  not  one 
in  three,  but  one  in  six,  according  to  the  law  of 
permutation.  It  could  have  been,  the  heavens 
first,  water  second,  earth  third,  but  that  was  not 
true;  it  could  have  been,  the  earth  first,  water 
second,  and  the  heavens  third,  but  that  was  not 
true.  It  could  have  been  water  first,  the  earth 
second,  and  the  heavens  last,  but  that  was  not 
true.  It  could  have  been  the  earth  first,  the  heav- 
ens second  and  water  last,  but  that  was  not  true. 
In  other  words  there  are  six  different  arrange- 
ments of  these  relations,  1-2-3,  1-3-2 ;  2-1-3,  2-3-1 ; 
3-2-1 ;  3-1-2,  But  Moses  somehow  struck  the 
right  one.  A  good  guesser !  Introduce  light  and 
you  make  twenty-four  such  relations.  But  Moses 
hit  it  again.  One  chance  in  twenty-four,  but  he 
was  the  lucky  man. 

When  you  get  the  fifth  you  have  120  possible 
orders.    Strange  to  say  Moses  does  not  miss  it! 

When  you  get  to  the  sixth,  you  have  720.  In 
other  words  there  are  719  chances  against  you. 
But  Moses  got  it  right! 

When  you  get  to  the  seventh,  you  have  5,040. 
In  other  words  5,039  chances  against  you.  But 
Moses  hit  it! 


I04  THE    FINALITY    OF 

When  you  get  to  the  eighth  you  have  40,320. 
Not  a  glorious  prospect  of  striking  it  straight, 
but  still  Moses  accomplishes  it! 

When  you  get  to  the  ninth  you  only  have  one 
chance  in  362,880. 

When  you  get  to  the  tenth,  you  have  only  one 
chance  in  3,628,800! 

When  you  get  to  the  eleventh,  39,916,800. 

When  you  get  to  the  fifteenth,  one  chance  in 
1,307,674,367,900.  And  yet,  strange  to  say,  in 
the  whole  arrangement,  he  never  misses ! 

Go  dig  up  Bob  Ingersoll,  and  give  the  poor 
fellow  a  chance  to  apologize  for  ever  having  spok- 
en of  the  "mistakes  of  Moses."  Bob  should  not 
come  alone! 

But  this  is  not  the  end.  We  make  bold  to  as- 
sert that  from  the  beginning  to  the  end  of  Gen- 
esis, 1st  Chapter,  there  is  not  a  scientific  mistake. 
It  is  scientific  that  the  heavens  were  created  first, 
and  the  earth  second.  The  very  latest  Science 
would  tell  you  that  the  earth  was  "waste  and 
void,"  and  the  "darkness,"  resulting  from  the 
nebulous  state,  "was  upon  the  face  of  the  deep." 
For  a  long  time  Science  spoke  of  the  third  verse 
as  certainly  involving  a  mistake,  "And  God  said, 
Let  there  be  light  and  there  was  light."  This,  in 
advance  of  the  appearance  of  the  sun  or  moon. 
They  supposed  that  the  sun  was  the  only  source 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  I05 

of  light,  but  finally  Laplace  declared  it  to  be  a 
scientific  certainty,  that  in  the  condensation  of  the 
originally  formless  chaos,  there  was  such  mole- 
cular and  chemical  action  as  must  have  emitted 
light.  No  wonder  Boardman,  in  his  "Creative 
Week,"  says,  "Why  will  the  Academy  vote  Moses 
a  blunderer  for  declaring  that  light  existed  be- 
fore the  sun  appeared,  and  yet  vote  Laplace  a  sci- 
entist for  affirming  precisely  the  same  thing?" 

The  next  point  of  scientific  attack  was  upon 
the  fifth  verse,  "And  there  was  evening,  and  there 
was  morning,  one  day."  It  was  boldly  asserted 
that  Moses  supposed  all  this  change  from  chaos 
to  cosmos  took  place  in  twenty-four  hours.  But 
mark  you,  Moses  does  not  refer  to  twenty-four 
hours  at  all !  "From  evening  to  morning"  is  on- 
ly twelve  hours.  You  will  not  have  fin- 
ished this  chapter  until  it  is  made  perfectly 
clear  that  Moses  is  not  speaking  of  twenty-four 
hour  days.  He  knew  the  law  of  herbs,  yielding 
seed  after  their  kind,  and  trees  bearing  fruit  af- 
ter their  kind,"  that  these  things  were  not  ac- 
complished in  a  day;  that  it  took  seasons  to  pro- 
duce fruit,  and  even  many  years,  to  mature  trees 
and  make  them  reproductive.  And  yet  that  whole 
process  he  mentions  as  in  the  third  day.  What 
is  God's  Day,  according  to  the  Bible?  In  the 
second  chapter  the  entire  creation,  from  start  to 


I06  THE  FINALITY  OP 

finish,  is  mentioned  as  having  occurred  in  a  day. 
It  could  not,  therefore,  according  to  Moses,  mean 
twenty-four  hours.  IVhat  is  a  "yom"  with  God? 
Peter  tells  us  "One  day  is  with  the  Lord  as  a 
thousand  years."  (2  Pet.  3:8).  Moses,  himself, 
in  the  ninetieth  Psalm,  declares  that  "a  thousand 
years  in  God's  sight  were  but  as  yesterday  when 
it  is  passed,  and  as  a  watch  in  the  night,"  and 
that  he  is  speaking  of  this  very  period  is  evident 
in  the  context,  where  he  says,  "Before  the  moun- 
tains were  brought  forth  and  thou  gavest  birth 
to  the  earth  and  the  world,  even  from  everlasting 
to  everlasting  (from  Olan  to  Olam:  or,  era  to 
era),  thou  art  God." 

But  surely  Moses  was  mistaken  in  the  eighth 
verse,  "And  God  called  the  firmament  heaven?'' 
Even  Mr.  Huxley  slipped  here,  by  charging 
Moses  with  believing  that  heaven  was  a  solid 
substance,  resting  like  a  canopy  over  the  earth. 
But  Mr.  Huxley  was  not  a  Hebrew  scholar; 
hence  his  mistake.  The  Hebrew  word  translated 
"firmament"  means  "expanse."  Can  you  beat  it 
by  your  latest  scientific  expression? 

The  ninth  verse  also  reveals  the  remarkable 
wisdom  vouchsafed  to  this  man,  "Let  the  waters 
under  the  heaven  be  gathered  together  in  one 
p'ace,  and  let  the  dry  land  appear."  There  was 
not  a  man  in  the  earth  at  that  time  that  knew. 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  I07 

or  could  have  known,  that  all  the  seas  were  linked 
together,  whereas  the  continents  are  divided.  But 
exploration  has  proven  it.  Dana,  in  his  Manual  of 
Geology,  says  that  while  the  continents  are  separa- 
ted, the  seas  occupy  one  bed.  As  to  the  order 
of  the  appearance  of  life.  Genesis  and  geology 
are  exactly  together,  beginning  with  grass,  and 
ending  with  man.  There  is  not  a  geological 
mistake  in  Genesis. 

Equally  remarkable  is  the  fact  that  instead  of 
speaking  of  the  sun  and  moon  as  giving  their 
light  from  the  first,  Moses  holds  back  their  rays 
until  the  fourth  day;  at  which  time  he  does  not 
declare  they  were  created,  for  that  belonged  in  the 
opening  sentence,  "In  the  beginning  God  created 
the  heavens" — but  they  were  made  to  "divide  the 
day  from  the  night,  "and  to  be  for  signs  and  for 
seasons  and  for  days  and  for  years."  Many  sci- 
entists believe  that  the  earth  took  on  its  present 
angle  of  axis  at  this  very  period  in  its  develop- 
ment, when  it  cooled  to  the  point  where  the  vapors 
condensed  and  fell  upon  it  as  water.  And  we 
know  that  without  that  axis-angle,  determining 
its  relation  to  the  sun  and  moon,  our  seasons 
would  fail,  and  we  would  return  to  an  ice-age ! 

Now  as  to  whether  the  law  of  generation,  as 
set  forth  in  Genesis,  "every  seed  after  its  kind" 
is  true,  or  whether  the  origin  of  species  is  by  "nat- 
ural selection,"  the  whole  weight  of  discovery  is 


loS  'niZ  FINALITY  OF 

with  Genesis  and  against  Darwin.  The  truth  of 
Genesis  we  know,  from  the  lowest  form  of  grass 
to  soulful  man ;  everything  is  bringing  forth  "af- 
ter its  kind."  We  have  seen  that  law  executed 
ten  thousands  times  and  in  millions  of  forms. 
The  creation  of  a  new  species,  by  natural  selec- 
tion, no  man  has  ever  yet  seen.  Why,  therefore, 
should  we  imagine  that  there  is  any  conflict  be- 
tween Scripture  and  Science?  At  every  point 
where  it  is  possible  to  institute  a  comparison  that 
is  reliable,  an  utter  agreement  appears!  The 
rocks,  from  the  lowest  strata  to  the  last  laid 
down,  confirm  the  facts  of  God's  creative  week. 

"A  Glory  guilds  the  Sacred  page 

Majestic  like  the  sun, 
It  gives  a  light  to  every  age, 

It  gives  but  borrows  none. 

The  hand  that  gave  it  still  supplies 
The  gracious  light  and  heat: 

His  truths  upon  the  nations  rise; 
They  rise,  but  never  set." 

Permit  me  to  mention  some  other  inexplicable 
instances  of  Science  in  Scripture.  Harvey,  in 
modern  times,  discovered  the  circulation  of  the 
blood,  and  declared  its  relation  to  life,  Moses 
affirmed  it  three  thousand  years  ago — "The  life 


THt  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  IO9 

is  in  the  blood."  You  have  heard  GaUleo  glorified 
for  having  discovered  that  this  part  of  the  uni- 
verse was  heliocentric  and  not  geocentric,  as  the 
ancients  supposed;  and  Newton  honorably  men- 
tioned for  his  great  discovery  of  the  law  of  gravi- 
tation. The  Scriptures  declared  both  a  few  thous- 
and years  before  these  brethren  were  born.  Job 
declared  of  the  day-spring,  that  it  "takes  hold 
of  the  ends  of  the  earth ;  it  is  turned  as  clay  to 
the  seal"  (38-13),  and  as  for  gravitation,  while 
scientists  and  churchmen  alike  were  adopting 
theories  of  the  earth's  support,  akin  to  that  which 
the  Hindus  now  hold,  namely,  that  it  was  a  flat 
plane,  with  possible  stories  above  and  below,  held 
up  by  the  heads  of  elephants,  with  their  tails  turn- 
ed out,  and  their  feet  resting  on  the  shell  of  an 
immense  tortoise,  and  the  tortoise  in  turn  on  the 
coil  of  a  snake,  Job  was  remonstrating  in  these 
words,  "He  hangeth  the  earth  upon  nothing,'' 
(26:7) — the  very  deliverance  of  your  latest  Sci- 
ence! 

It  is  only  in  very  modern  times  that  any  man 
imagined  the  atmosphere  to  have  any  weight,  and 
we  still  employ  the  phrase,  "light  as  air"  and  yet 
we  know  that  it  has  a  weight  of  fifteen  pounds 
to  every  square  inch;  and  modern  science  could 
almost  tell  you  exactly  what  was  the  awful  pres- 
sure upon  the  face  of  the  globe  twenty-five  thous- 
and miles  in  circumference.    This,  however,  wa.s 


no  THE  FINALITY  OF 

not  information  to  the  Old  Testament  writers  I 
Job,  one  of  the  most  ancient  of  them  all,  says  of 
God,  that  "he  makes  a  weight  for  the  wind ;  yea, 
he  meeteth  out  the  waters  by  measure."  Galileo 
discovered  that  air  has  gravity ;  but  thirty  centu- 
ries before  him  Job  affirmed  the  same.  It  would 
seem,  therefore,  that  inspiration  is  as  accurate 
as  experimentation. 

It  is  only  within  a  few  years  that  weather 
bureaus  have  had  any  occasion ;  that  men  imag- 
ined storms  of  cloud  and  wind,  and  waves  of  heat 
and  cold  obeyed  unchangeable  laws,  and  might, 
therefore,  be  tabulated  and  reported  even  in  ad- 
vance of  their  arrival.  But  Solomon  understood 
it  and  wrote  long  since,  in  Ecclesiastes  i  :6,  "The 
wind  goeth  toward  the  south  and  turneth  about 
unto  the  north.  It  turneth  about  continually  in 
its  course,  and  the  wind  returneth  again  to  its 
circuits."  It  is  only  by  modern  discoveries  that 
men  imagined  that  there  were  other  sounds  than 
those  which  our  ears  catch;  but  now  we  know 
that  when  we  pass  thirty-eight  thousand  vibra- 
tions per  second,  the  ear  cannot  follow,  and  ev- 
ery heavenly  body,  in  its  motions,  is  making  mus- 
ic, so  that  Job  was  not  mistaken  when  he  declar- 
ed "the  morning  stars  sang  together,"  nor  David 
when  he  declared  of  Jehovah,  "Thou  makest  the 
morning  and  the  evening  to  rejoice." 

Arthur  Pierson,  after  having  called  attention 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  Ill 

to  some  of  these  remarkable  instances  of  agree- 
ment, says  Shakespeare  was  right  when  he  wrote  : 

"There's  not  the  smallest  orb  which  thou  behold- 

est, 
But  in  his  motion,  like  an  angel  sings, 
Still  choiring  to  the  young-eyed  cherubim. 
Such  harmony  is  in  immortal  souls ; 
But  whilst  this  muddy  vesture  of  decay 
Doth  grossly  close  it  in,  we  cannot  hear  it." 

We  candidly  believe  that  if  the  men  who  are 
spending  much  time  in  seeing  what  can  be  said 
against  the  Scriptures,  should  assume  a  friendly 
attitude  and  search  with  a  kindred  diligence  for 
its  remarkable  defenses,  they  could  find  them 
with  utter  ease,  and  would  be  shortly  confirmed  in 
the  "faith  once  delivered"  and  able  to  boast  with 
the  poet: 

"I  paused  one  day  beside  the  blacksmith's  door 
And  listened  to  the  anvil  ring  the  evening's  chime. 
And  looking  in  I  saw  upon  the  floor, 
Old  hammers,  worn  with  beating  years  of  time." 

'How  many  anvils  have  you  had,'  said  I, 
'To  wear  and  batter  out  these  hammers  so?' 
'Just  one,'  he  answered,  with  a  twinkling  eye, 
'The  anvil  wears  the  hammers  out,  you  know.' " 


112  THE  FINALITY  OF 

"And  SO,  I  thought,  the  Anvil  of  God's  Word 
For  ages  skeptic  blows  have  beat  upon; 
Yet,  though  the  noise  of  infidel  was  heard 
The  anvil  is  unworn,  the  hammers  gone!" 

SOME  POINTS  WHERF  COMPARISON  IS  IMPOSSIBLE. 

Not  to  all  subjects  to  which  Science  speaks 
do  the  Scriptures  address  themselves.  It  is  equal- 
ly true  that  the  Scriptures  discuss  many  subjects 
with  which  Science  has  naught  to  do.  There  are 
points  in  human  experience  where  the  micro- 
scope, the  scalpel,  the  telescope  tell  us  nothing. 
They  transcend  all  scientific  investigation !  Tyn- 
dall  admitted  that  the  problem  of  the  universe 
would  probably  never  be  solved !  And  yet  that 
problem  is  not  more  difficult  than  are  the  prob- 
lems of  sin,  substitution  and  salvation, 

A  man  may  easily  say  that  Moses  was  mis- 
taken when  he  declared  how  sin  came  into  the 
world.  But  who  will  attempt  to  demonstrate  it 
and  how  ?  We  know  that  sin  is  here.  The  Bible 
affirms  that  it  came  through  an  evil  spirit ;  that 
man  accepted  his  suggestion  and  continues  to  ac- 
cept it,  and  so  suffers  the  penalty  of  violated  law. 
Who  has  presented  a  saner  explanation  of  sin? 

It  is  the  height  of  folly  to  speak  of  "the 
Scriptures  as  teaching  that  the  innocent  must 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  II3 

suffer  for  the  sins  of  the  guilty,"  "that  children 
are  condemned  because  of  their  parents'  blun- 
der." It  never  hints  such  a  thing,  and  it  never 
did.  The  second  commandment  does  not  say  that 
God  is  visiting  the  iniquities  of  the  fathers  upon 
their  innocent  children,  but  it  does  affirm  that 
"judgment  falls  upon  the  third  and  fourth  gen- 
eration of  them  that  hate  him,"  and  why  shouldn't 
it,  unto  generations  of  generations?  Shall  men 
hate  God  and  escape  judgment?  The  law,  when 
first  declared  was,  "The  soul  that  sinneth  it  shall 
die."  Is  not  that  law  righteous  ?  The  Scriptures 
are  very  careful  to  follow  that  statement  with 
another  from  the  pen  of  Ezekiel,  "The  son  shall 
not  bear  the  iniquity  of  the  father ;  neither  shall 
the  father  bear  the  iniquity  of  the  son.  The 
righteousness  of  the  righteous  shall  be  upon  him ; 
and  the  wickedness  of  the  wicked  shall  be  upon 
him." 

It  may  be  easy  enough  to  set  up  untenable 
theories  of  sin,  and  assign  them  either  to  the 
Sacred  Scriptures,  or  to  the  conservative  de- 
fenders of  the  same,  when  neither  have  ever 
spoken  aught  to  warrant  such  caricature.  I  have 
been  in  the  ministry  for  twenty-six  years.  My 
daily  associations,  of  an  intrinsic  character,  have 
been  with  the  conservative  wing  of  the  church, 
and  in  that  entire  time  I  have  never  heard  Je- 
hovah described  as  a  God  who  visited  the  sins 


114  THE    FINALITY    OF 

of  guilty  parents  upon  the  heads  of  innocent 
children,  by  any  one  of  them.  On  the  contrary, 
they  have  depicted  Jehovah  as  a  God  of  infinite 
love,  punishing  no  innocent  men  or  women ;  even 
pitying  the  sinner  and  proffering  him  grace  in 
Jesus  Christ.  Will  the  man  who  sets  himself 
up  as  a  student  of  Science,  and  a  preacher  of  *:>' 
up  as  a  student  of  Science,  and  a  preachei  of  the 
Sacred  Scriptures,  object;  and,  if  so,  has  he  a 
better  view  of  God  to  present? 

Again,  if  the  God  who  breathed  upon  the 
waste  of  a  darkened  world,  and  converted  its 
chaos  into  cosmos,  and  quickened  its  death  into 
life,  is  willing  to  do  the  same  for  a  man  "dead 
in  trespasses  and  sins,"  will  men  object,  or  the 
scientist  dispute  His  right  ?  Cannot  He  of  whom 
Milton  sang,  saying, 

"Thou  from  the  first 

Wast  present,  and  with  mighty  wings  outstretch- 
ed. 
Dove-like,  sat'st  brooding  on  the  vast  abyss. 
And  madest  it  pregnant," 

quicken  our  dead  souls  that  they  shall  live  again  ? 
If  we  cannot  bind  the  influences  of  the  Pleiades, 
shall  we  attempt  to  set  limits  to  the  work  of 
God's  own  Spirit,  or  demand  that  He  bring 
His  endeavors  within  the  limits  of  natural  ex- 
planation ? 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  II5 

Is  it  not  written,  "Except  one  be  born  of  wa- 
ter and  the  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into  the  King- 
dom of  God.  And  that  which  is  born  of  the 
flesh  is  flesh ;  and  that  which  is  born  of  the  Spir- 
it is  spirit,"  and  are  we  not  enjoined  to  "marvel 
not"  about  it,  since  "the  wind  bloweth  where  it 
will,  and  thou  hearest  the  voice  thereof,  but 
knowest  jiot  whence  it  cometh  and  whither  it 
goeth,"  and  told,  "so  is  every  one  that  is  born  of 
the  Spirit?"  Just  how  it  happens  that  the  drunken 
man  who  staggers  into  a  sanctuary  and  listens  to 
the  Gospel  of  the  Son  of  God,  and  goes  out,  never 
to  drink  again,  supported,  in  his  new  sobriety,  by 
the  sense  of  Divine  love.  Science  may  never  be 
able  to  explain;  but  that  does  not  disprove  what 
you  and  I  have  seen. 

Just  how  it  happens  that  the  woman  who  has 
walked  in  the  ways  of  wickedness,  is  suddenly 
roused  to  repentance  by  the  rehearsal  of  the  di- 
vine goodness,  scientists  may  not  even  see,  but  the 
Son  of  Man  rejoices  and  the  angels  are  made  hap- 
py by  the  sight  of  His  face.  You  can  deny  the  di- 
rect creation  of  man  in  the  divine  image  if  vou 
like,  but  you  will  never  be  able  to  disprove  it. 
You  may  deny  the  unity  of  the  race,  but  even 
there  the  evidences  are  against  you ;  you  may 
deny  the  description  of  the  fall,  but  sin  remains 
unexplained.  You  may  deny  that  there  is  any 
supernaturalism ,  and  yet,  as  against  that,  we  say 


Il6  THE   FINALITY   OF 

that  he  who  starts  along  the  path  clearly  marked 
in  Sacred  Scripture  will  go  from  sin  to  salvation ; 
from  salvation  to  sanctification,  and  from  sancti- 
fication  to  the  eternal  fellowship  of  the  Father. 

Years  ago  we  went  through  the  Hoo- 
sac  Tunnel  for  the  first  time.  Did  you  ever  hear 
how  it  was  constructed  ?  There  started  two  com- 
panies of  men  to  work  on  opposite  sides  of  the 
mountain,  but  the  survey  had  been  so  accurate- 
ly made  that  when  the  men  met  midway,  the 
walls  of  the  excavations  were  not  an  inch  off 
the  line. .  But  the  man  who  wants  to  turn  home 
to  God  and  heaven  has  more  than  an  accurate 
line  marked  by  survey ;  he  has  a  well-beaten  road 
lying  full  before  him.  Others  have  gone  over  it 
by  the  thousands;  yea,  by  the  millions,  and  as 
the  prodigal  who  trudged  his  way  back  to  the 
farm  house,  from  which  he  had  been  so  long  sep- 
arated, by  a  well-traveled  road,  found  his  Father 
coming  forth  to  meet  him,  so  shall  the  lost  man 
find  God  if  he  but  turn  his  feet  to  the  path  upon 
which  there  falls  the  light  of  this  Word! 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  II7 


Chapter  VI. 


THE  FINALITY  OF  THE  HIGHER 
CRITCISM. 

"I  charge  thee  in  the  sight  of  God,  and  of 
Christ  Jesus,  who  shall  judge  the  living  and  the 
dead,  and  by  his  appearing  and  his  kingdom: 
preach  the  word :  be  urgent  in  season,  out  of 
season;  reprove,  rebuke,  exhort,  with  all  long 
suffering  and  teaching.  For  the  time  will  come 
when  they  will  not  endure  sound  doctrine;  but, 
having  itching  ears,  will  heap  to  themselves  teach- 
ers after  their  own  lusts ;  and  will  turn  away  their 
ears  from  the  truth,  and  turn  aside  unto  fables," 
(2  Tim.  4:1-4). 

When  one  reads  the  epistles  of  John  he  is  pro- 
foundly impressed  with  the  thought  that  the 
Spirit  of  God  anticipated  some  of  the  most  hurt- 
ful heresies  of  these  latter  times  and  answered 
them  entirely,  two  thousand  years  before  they 
were  born ;  such,  for  instance,  as  the  unscriptural 
doctrine  of  "Perfectionism"  preached  in  some 
parts,  and  that  masterpiece  of  Satan,  "Christian 
Science,"  and  its  allied  movements,  "Spiritual- 


Il8  THE  FINALITY  OF 

ism,"  "Theosophy,"  "New  Thought,"  etc.  Paul, 
as  a  contributor  to  the  New  Testament  exceeds 
even  John,  and  while  there  is  scarcely  any  error 
of  doctrine  or  practice  which  he  passes  over  with- 
out reproof,  he  was  peculiarly  employed  by  the 
Spirit  of  God  to  anticipate  and  reprove  attacks 
to  be  made  upon  "the  Word  of  God."  Our  text  is 
only  one  of  many  which  the  great  Apostle  ad- 
dresses to  this  evident  end. 

Any  natural  interpretation  of  this  text  makes 
it  applicable  to  the  subject  in  hand,  namely,  "The 
Finality  of  the  Higher  Criticism." 

In  glancing  the  text  through  we  call  your  at- 
tention to  four  of  its  suggestions — The  Higher 
Criticism  and  the  Word ;  The  Higher  Criticism 
and  the  War;  Higher  Criticism  and  Apostasy 
and  Higher  Criticism  as  a  Propaganda. 

HIGHER   CRITICISM    AND  THE   WORD. 

"Preach  the  Word."  The  great  questions  of 
the  present  controversy,  in  the  theological  world, 
are  these,  "What  is  the  Word  ?"  and  "What  of  the 
Word?"  "Is  the  Bible  a  divinely  inspired  mes- 
sage ?"  "Are  its  historical  statements  reliable  ?" 
"Is  its  moral  code  binding?" 

To  all  of  these  questions  Higher  Criticism  ad- 
dresses itself.  We  propose  to  bring  you  its 
answers     from      a     man      who     is     regarded 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  II9 

in  many  quarters  as  a  radical;  and  yet  from  a 
book  which  comes  more  nearly  revealing  not  alone 
the  concept  and  custom  of  this  critical  method, 
but  its  final  and  logical  conclusions,  than  any 
other  put  forth  up  to  the  present.  We  refer  to 
George  Burman  Foster's  volume,  "The  Finality 
of  the  Christian  Religion." 

According  to  it,  these  three  assertions  will 
not  be  disputed:  (i)  Higher  Criticism  denies 
the  inspiriation  of  the  Word.  (2)  Higher  Crit- 
icism disputes  the  reliability  of  the  Word.  (3) 
Higher  Criticism  rejects  the  authority  of  the 
Word. 

Higher  Criticism  denies  the  inspiration  of  the 
Word.  On  page  63  Dr.  Foster  says,  "The  doc- 
trine of  the  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures  ....  is 
of  pagan  origin."  And  on  page  87  the  author 
asserts  that  the  doctrine  of  Verbal  Inspiration 
was  first  given  up,  then  inspiration  as  a  divine 
guidance  in  the  writing  down  of  what  was  super- 
naturally  revealed  was  surrendered ;  that  the  next 
step  was  to  think  of  it  as  "a  mere  negative  pro- 
tection from  error ;"  but  it  was  impossible  to  stop 
there,  and  so  they  concluded  that  this  protection 
referred  only  to  the  "religious  content."  But 
since  the  "religious  content"  was  often  but  the 
work  of  mortal  men,  it  was  decided  that  "only 
Jesus  was  inerrant ;"  and  then  that  His  inerrancy 


I20  THE  FINALITY  OF 

applied  only  to  the  "region  of  religious  truth." 
But,  as  if  even  this  was  too  great  a  concession 
for  the  Critics  to  make,  Dr.  Foster  remarks,  "The 
inspiration  of  the  Book  is  untrue  historically  and 
impossible  psychologically." 

Higher  Criticism  disputes  the  reliability  of  the 
Word.  This  is  the  inevitable  result  of  logic. 
Without  a  divine  inspiration  it  is  impossible  that 
the  Scriptures  should  be  reliable.  Dr.  Foster  ac- 
cepts that  consequence  and  carries  the  result  to 
its  inevitable  end,  affirming  that  even  Jesus  took 
on  the  form  attributed  to  Him  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament through  "emotional  reconstruction."  (p. 
396.)  His  infatuated  followers  "dehumanized 
and  spiritualized  Him."  Their  affectionate  feel- 
ings for  Jesus  went  so  far  that  "no  man  can  tell 
where  facts  end  and  embellishment  of  facts  be- 
gins," (p.  396).  Adding  to  this  argument,  losses 
sustained  by  translation  from  one  language  to  an- 
other, Dr.  Foster  concludes,  "We  do  not  surely 
know  that  we  have  any  strictly  authentic  words 
of  Jesus."     (p.  400). 

If  the  New  Testament  writers,  who  were  con- 
fessedly eye-witnesses  of  the  historical  facts  of 
Christ's  life,  are  incapacitated  to  write  the  trrth 
by  reason  of  their  ardent  admiration  of  the  Man 
of  Nazareth,  and  what  they  have  written  may 
not  be  known  to  us  because  of  the  difficulties  of 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  121 

translation,  how  much  more  unrehable  is  the  en- 
tire Old  Testament,  which  deals  in  many  instances 
with  ages  to  which  the  writers  did  not  belong, 
and  has  reached  us  by  a  process  of  translation 
fraught  with  far  greater  dangers? 

There  is  another,  and  natural  step  to  be  taken, 
and  notwithstanding  the  gravity  of  its  conse- 
quences, it  is  accepted  by  the  Critics. 

Higher  Criticism  rejects  the  authority  of  the 
Word.  Dr.  Foster  goes  so  far  as  to  affirm  that 
"there  is  no  evidence  up  to  150  A.  D.  that  any 
New  Testament  writers  were  supposed  to  be  evtm 
sacred."  (p.  106).  He  asserts,  "There  does  not 
seem  to  be  any  passage  of  literature  in  the  sub- 
apostolic  generation  that  warrants  the  conclusion 
that  an  apostolic  letter  was  appealcil  to  as  a 
sacred  writing."  To  be  sure,  the  Doctor  is  a 
metaphysician  rather  than  a  studen<-  oi  Sacred 
Writ,  and  he  may  be  excused  for  hi.i  ignorance 
of  what  Peter  wrote  in  his  second  epistle,  3:15- 
16,  quoting  from  Paul,  and  referring  to  "  the 
wisdom  given  him."  "Wherefore,  beloved,  see- 
ing that  ye  look  for  these  things,  give  diligence 
that  ye  may  be  found  in  peace,  without  spot  and 
blameless  in  his  sight.  And  account  that  the 
long  suffering  of  our  Lord  is  salvation ;  even 
as  our  beloved  brother  Paul  also,  according  to 
the  wisdom  given  him,  wrote  unto  you;  as  also 


122  THE  FINALITY  OP 

in  all  his  epistles,  speaking  in  them  of  these 
things,  wherein  are  some  things  hard  to  be  under- 
stood, which  the  ignorant  and  unsteadfast  wrest, 
as  they  do  also  the  other  scriptures,  unto  their 
own  destruction." 

And  yet,  the  men  who  deny  the  inspiration  of 
the  Word,  dispute  its  reliability  and  reject  its  au- 
thority are  not  altogether  willing  to  give  it  up, 
retiring  it  to  some  shelf  of  neglect,  and  treating 
it  as  obsolete.  Somehow  or  other,  often  having 
slain  it,  they  are  loath  to  lay  it  away.  We  wonder 
whether,  after  all,  if  they  are  not  a  little  alarmed 
lest,  if  they  did  this,  the  world  might  lose  its 
moral  light,  and  the  much  boasted  Reason,  in 
which  they  have  trusted,  return  to  its  groveling 
as  it  has  done  in  those  parts  of  Italy  and  Spain 
where  priests  and  Pope  have  taken  the  Bible  from 
the  people,  and  in  Mexico  and  Cuba  and  South 
America,  where  Reason  has  been  untrammeled  by 
any  special  knowledge  of  the  Word,  and  even, 
as  in  fair  France,  where  the  goddess  of  Reason 
was  enthroned  one  hundred  years  ago,  to  witness 
the  immediate  Reign  of  Terror.  Henry 
Rogers,  in  his  "EcHpse  of  Faith,"  hints  what 
would  happen  were  the  Critics  successful  and  the 
Bible  once  for  all  flung  away  by  men.  He  re- 
cords a  dream  entitled,  "The  Blank  Bible," 
in  which  the  world  had  awakened    one  mom- 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  12.3 

ing  to  discover  that  every  copy  of  the  Sacred 
Scriptures  in  all  the  earth  had  been  suddenly 
withdrawn  from  among  men,  and  blank  books 
left  in  their  stead.  And  then  he  depicts  the  dis- 
appointment of  the  unsaved  that  even  the  way 
of  salvation  no  longer  existed  for  them;  the  de- 
privation of  old  age  that  it  no  longer  had  the 
promises  upon  which  to  pillow  its  head ;  the  uni- 
versal anxiety  concerning  coming  morals,  and  so 
on.  Dr.  Arthur  Pierson,  speaking  to  this  re- 
puted dream  says,  'What  if  every  Bible  should 
turn  to  blank  paper,  and  all  that  other  books 
have  borrowed  from  it  vanish  likewise !  What 
if  all  that  it  has  wrought  in  man  and  for  man 
could  be  obliterated  from  human  character  and 
history ! — all  ideas  and  ideals  of  chastity  and 
charity,  equity  and  ethics,  rhercy  and  magnanimi- 
ty ;  all  the  motives  for  morality  and  piety,  heroism 
and  martyrdom,  which  it  has  supplied!"  W^ho 
can  conceive  the  wreck  and  ruin  that  would  reach 
into  every  heart  and  home,  church  and  communi- 
ty ?  And  yet  such  is  the  logical  process  of  High- 
er Criticism.  If  its  conclusions  were  accepted 
today,  the  scene  in  the  streets  of  Ephesus  would 
necessarily  be  re-enacted,  and  the  works  of  those 
who  practiced  the  magical  art  of  imposing 
"myths"  and  "mistakes"  upon  men  in  the  name 
of  inspiration,  would  be  burned  to  white-ash  in 


124  THE    FINALITY    OF 

the  sight  of  all.  Are  the  Critics  ready  to  take 
the  responsibility  of  such  a  procedure?  Yet 
wherein  is  the  difference  between  heaping  your 
Bibles  in  one  colossal  pile  and  firing  them,  and 
accepting  the  conclusions  of  a  George  Burman 
Foster?  To  some  of  us,  at  least,  the  process  of 
firing  were  far  preferable  to  the  retention  of  a 
book  whose  claims  of  heavenly  birth  arc  false, 
whose  commands  are  only  the  invention  of  men, 
whose  supposed  historical  records  are  simply 
myths,  or  at  the  most  a  combination  of  fact  and 
fancy ;  and  whose  plan  of  salvation,  culminating 
in  a  Christ — the  sinner's  substitute — is  purely  a 
delusion. 

But  we  are  not  fully  convinced  that  such  is 
our  dilemma,  for  our  text  speaks  to  another  sub- 
ject, namely, 

HICHFR    CRITICISM    AND    THE    WAR. 

"Preach  the  word ;  be  urgent  in  season,  out 
of  season ;  reprove,  rebuke,  exhort,  with  all  long- 
suffering  and  teaching."  It  is  just  possible  that 
this  procedure  is  not  out  of  date;  it  is  just  possi- 
ble that  Paul  is  a  better  instructor  than  Foster; 
it  is  just  possible  that  we  have  a  right  to  pit  this 
ancient  scholar,  who  was  converted  from  infideli- 
ty to  "the  faith  that  is  in  Christ"  against  "the 
modern  man"  who  has  turned  from  Christ  to  the 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  125 

infidelity  of  Rationalism ;  and  that  "reproof,"  "re- 
buke" and  "instruction"  are  not  out  of  place  for 
even  a  Higher  Critic. 

To  be  sure,  Higher  Criticism  seriously  ob- 
jects to  this  procedure. 

It  excites  controversy  but  expects  exemption 
from  reproof.  There  was  a  time  when  our  Crit- 
ics were  not  much  given  to  controversy.  All 
that  they  claimed  for  their  effusions  was  "a  ser- 
ies of  tentative  suggestions."  Even  now  they  are 
careful  to  employ  suave  speech,  and  condone  the 
offense  of  denying  inspiration  by  enconiums  on 
the  "moral  majesty"  of  Jesus;  and  the  "superior 
literary  character"  of  some  of  the  sixty-six 
books.  Their  procedure  reminds  an  English  wri- 
ter of  the  executioner  who  bowed  down  before 
Charles  I,  kissed  his  hand,  and  begged  his  pardon 
for  the  unpleasant  business  in  which  he  was  en- 
gaged, but  neverheless  beheaded  him  straight- 
way. Referring  to  the  incident  Dr.  George 
Lorimer  reminds  us  that  today  "Infidelity,  wear- 
ing a  mask  and  uttering  courtly  words,  is  sharp- 
ening the  axe  with  which  to  take  olt  the  hepd 
of  Christianity."  H  Dr.  Foster  is  to  be  accepted, 
the  Head  of  Christianity  is  off  alieady.  And 
yet  when  he  is  reproved  he  whines;  when  he 
is  told  he  has  no  place  in  an  evat.gelical  pulpit 
or  an  evangelical  denomination  he  is  offended; 


126  THE  PINALITY  OP 

and  his  defenders  stand  up  in  xUcir  pulpits  on 
the  following  Sunday  and  affirm  that  "if  his  op- 
posers  dared  they  would  burn  him  ai  the  slake." 
It  is  too  bad  that  a  man  who  occupies  a  Univer- 
sity chair  must  be  reproved  by  hii'  brethren ;  and 
yet  if  Peter  in  his  impetuosity  resented  the  first 
arrest  and  crucifixion  of  Jesus,  perhaps  the  mod- 
ern believer  may  be  pardoned  for  refusing  to 
stand  by  in  silence  while  the  risen  Christ  is  "cru- 
cified afresh  and  put  to  an  open  shame."' 

It  raises  a  rebellion,  but  objects  to  any  rebuke. 
"Rebellion"  is  the  word  we  mean  to  employ,  for 
these  men  are  no  longer  aliens;  tli-.y  are  in  tJie 
camp.  They  insist  upon  retaining  the  uniform 
of  Christ's  army.  They  take  the  banner  of  Jesus, 
inscribed  with  Kis  name,  and  bear  it  above  their 
own  heads.  They,  like  Absalom,  while  swearing 
loyalty  to  the  government  of  the  king,  are  indus- 
triously seeking  the  disaffected  and  organizing 
against  the  day  of  the  king's  overthrow.  Why 
should  they  object  to  rebuke?  Conservatives  have 
not  provoked  this  controversy.  These  Goliaths 
have  been  bestirring  themselves  and  have  been 
saying,  "Come  to  us  and  we  will  give  thy  carcass- 
es to  the  birds."  While  a  stone  from  a  sling  does 
not  feel  good,  David  is  not  altogether  to  blame 
when  he  answers  the  challenge.  Is  the  house- 
holder who  refuses  to  have  his  house  spoileu  to 


THE    HIGHER   CRITICISM.  127 

be  regarded  ungracious  and  even  contentious? 
Is  the  student  who  takes  his  stand  before  the 
door  of  his  library  and  objects  to  having  people 
purloin  volumes  at  their  pleasure  to  be  con- 
demned as  having  incited  battle  ?  Is  the  Christian 
believer,  who  rebukes  a  critic  that  would  tear  his 
Bible  into  shreds  and  dump  the  remainder  into 
the  ash  heap,  to  be  written  down  as  intolerant  and 
tne  ash  heap,  to  be  written  down  as  intolerant  and 
charged  with  mental  martyrdom?  To  be  sure  it 
is  a  free  country,  and  yet  there  may  be  some  limit 
to  license.  Dr.  Dixon  tells  the  story  of  a  man 
who  was  taking  his  gymnastic  exercises  on  the 
public  street.  As  he  widely  flung  his  arms  he 
struck  the  nose  of  a  passer-by.  Instantly  the  fel- 
low landed  a  blow  at  the  base  of  the  ear.  When 
the  athlete  complained  that  this  was  "a  free 
country"  and  he  ought  to  be  permitted  to  take 
his  gymnastics  at  his  pleasure,  it  was  re- 
joined, "It  is  a  free  country;  but  where 
my  nose  begins  your  liberty  ends."  The  believer 
regards  the  Bible  as  valuable  above  any  individ- 
ual life ;  and  a  blow  against  it  is  a  deeper  wound 
than  can  be  inflicted  upon  his  person.  The  man, 
therefore,  who  makes  this  attack,  should  under- 
stand forever  that  he  must  expect  rebuke.  Tim- 
othy cannot  easily  turn  truant  to  his  commi.«ision, 
and  he  is  commanded  to  "Guard  the  sacred  ora- 
cles."   In  the  opinion  of  Conservatives  at  least, 


128  THE  FINALITY  OF 

the  epistle  of  Jude  is  still  inspired  and  by  him 
they  are  exhorted  to  "contend  earnestly  for  the 
faith  which  was  once  for  all  delivcrea  unto  the 
saints." 

It  essays  to  teach,  but  resents  conservative  ex- 
hortation.  "Exhort,  with  all  longsulierinj^  and 
teaching."  Dr.  Foster  argues  (p.  163)  that  as  the 
fathers  were  mistaken  in  their  interpretations  of 
the  faith,  and  opposed  the  progress  of  science, 
so  are  their  sons  doing.  He  likens  the  position 
of  the  Conservatives  to  that  of  the  ecclesiastics 
who  persecuted  Galileo;  to  the  opinion  of  John 
Calvin  that  the  "heavens,  sun  and  moon  move 
about  the  earth;"  and  to  the  notion  of  Fromun- 
dus  that  if  the  earth  rotated  "buildings  would  fly 
off  with  such  rapid  motion  that  men  would  have 
to  be  provided  with  claws,  like  cats,  to  enable 
them  to  hold  fast  to  the  earth's  surface,"  But  the 
Doctor  forgets  that  one  can  go  back  into  so-called 
science  and  recall  even  more  ludicrous  mistakes. 
When  did  we  learn  that  the  world  was  not  on 
a  turtle's  back,  or  borne  by  the  shoulders  of  At- 
las? If  the  interpreters  of  the  Scriptures  made 
mistakes,  and  they  did,  what  about  the 
interpretations  of  the  so-called  science  of  the 
present?  What  science  of  twenty-five  years 
ago  is  still  retained  in  all  of  its  particu- 
lars ?  If  the  mistakes  of  past  theologians  are  to  be 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  129 

thrown  into  the  faces  of  the  present-day  Biblical 
scholars,  are  the  mistakes  of  metaphysicians  and 
so-called  scientists  of  yesterday  to  be  ignored  in 
the  question  of  the  present  time  shibboleth  ?  If  the 
Rationalists  who  dethrone  God  and  repudiate  the 
Scriptures  in  France,  see  a  reign  of  terror  in 
flagrant  lusts,  disintegration  of  life  and  society, 
can  a  professor — David  Schmidt,  of  Cornell, 
stand  up  today  and  tell  us  that  "Christianity  has 
failed  to  adapt  itself  to  the  spiritual  needs  of 
man;"  "that  the  supernatural  in  religion  is  fool- 
ishness ;"  "there  is  no  throne  beyond ;"  "no  life," 
and  the  world  escape  the  bitter  fruits  of  such  fol- 
ly— formulated  in  the  name  of  science?  It  is 
nothing  short  of  desecration  of  this  good  term 
"science"  when  men  put  it  to  such  uses.  "The 
heavens  declare  the  glory  of  God ;  and  the  firma- 
ment showeth  His  handiwork."  Neither  in  the 
one  nor  the  other  is  there  a  solitary  conflict  with 
the  faith  revealed  in  Sacred  Writ. 

"In  Regions  here  they  all  rejoice 
And  utter  forth  a  glorious  voice, 
Forever  singing  as  they  shine 
The  hand  that  made  us  is  Divine." 


130  THE  FINALITY  OF 

THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  AS  AN  APOSTASY. 

"The  time  will  come  when  they  will  not  en- 
dure sound  doctrine,  but,  having  itching  ears, 
will  heap  to  themselves  teachers  after  their  own 
lusts." 

It  is  an  apostasy  from,  sound  doctrine.  At 
every  single  point — fundamental  to  the  faith  of 
the  believer — Higher  Criticism  parts  company 
with  the  Scriptures.  The  Bible  says,  "Sin  is  the 
transgression  of  the  law."  Foster  says,  "Sin  is 
error;  a  defect  in  knowledge."  (p.  187).  The 
Bible  teaches  that  our  salvation  inheres  in  Christ's 
substitution,  "He  bare  our  sins  in  his  own  body 
on  the  tree."  Foster  says,  "Salvation  consists  in 
rectification  of  knowledge."  The  Bible  insists 
that  sound  doctrine  is  essential  to  our  sanctific?  • 
tion  .  "Sanctify  them  through  thy  truth;  thy 
word  is  truth."  Foster  says,  "The  thing  to  be 
set  right  is  not  a  set  of  ideas  but  the  bent  of  the 
will.  The  agency  to  be  employed  is  not  now 
'sound  doctrine'  so  much  as  sound  personality." 
The  Bible  puts  into  the  lips  of  Jesus  these  words, 
"No  man  cometh  unto  the  father  but  by  me." 
Foster  repudiates  it  by  saying,  "God  is  as  good 
as  Jesus.  Then  we  may  have  the  faith  whiMi  the 
gospel  requires — faith  in  God  the  Father,  in  his 
fatherly  grace  in  forgiving  sins,  and  in  an  eternal 
life."    (p.  518). 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  I3I 

It  is  an  answer  to  those  "having  itching  ears." 
But  having  "itching  ears  will  heap  to  themselves 
teachers  after  their  own  lusts."  The  world  is  full 
of  people  who  want  to  hear  some  new  thing.  The 
fact  that  Higher  Criticism  is  a  novelty  is  its 
chief  attraction.  George  Ade  is  much  given  to 
slang,  but  he  often  expresses  the  soundest  philos 
ophy  in  the  same.  In  his  fable,  "The  Preacher 
who  Flew  His  Kite"  he  hits  off  this  weakness  of 
human  nature.  (The  capitals  are  Ade's.)  A 
particular  parson  was  conscious  that  "he 
was  not  making  a  hit  with  his  congrega- 
tion ;"  and  he  knew  that  "there  must  be  something 
wrong  with  his  Talk."  He  had  been  trying  to  talk 
"in  a  clear  and  straightforward  Manner,  omit- 
ting Foreign  Quotations"  and  putting  up  for  illus- 
trations "such  Historical  Characters  as  were  fa- 
miliar to  his  Hearers,  putting  the  stubby  Old 
English  words  ahead  of  the  Latin,  and  rather 
flying  low  along  the  Intellectual  Plane  of  the  Ag- 
gregation that  chipped  in  to  pay  his  salary.  But 
the  Pew-Holders  were  not  tickled.  They  could 
Understand  everything  he  said,  and  they  began 
to  think  he  was  Common."  So  he  studied  the 
situation  and  on  the  Sunday  morning  following 
"got  up  in  the  Lookout  and  read  a  text  that  didn't 
mean  anything."  "Then  he  sized  up  his  Flock 
with  a  Dreamy  Eye  and  said :    'We  cannot  more 


132  GHE  FINALITY  OF 

adequately  voice  the  Poetry  and  Mysticism  of 
our  Text  than  in  those  familiar  Lines  of  the  great 
Icelandic  Poet,  Ikon  Navrojik:' 
"To  hold  is  not  to  have — 
Under  the  seared  Firmament, 
Where  Chaos  sweeps,  and  Vast  Futurity 
Sneers   at   these   puny   Aspirations — 
There  is  the  full  Reprisal." 

"When  the  Preacher  concluded  this  Extract  from 
the  Well-Known  Icelandic  Poet,  he  paused  and 
looked  downward,  breathing  heavily  through  his 
Nose,  like  Camille  in  the  Third  Act."  The  ven- 
erable harness  dealer  was  nodding  approvingly. 
"Having  wiped  his  brow,  he  took  a  turn  at  Qua- 
rolius,  who  he  claimed  had  "disputed  the  Conten- 
tion of  the  great  Persian  Theologian  Ramtazuk, 
that  the  Soul,  in  its  reaching  out  after  the  Un- 
knowable, was  guided  by  the  Scriptural  Genesis  of 
Motive  rather  than  by  mere  Impulse  of  Mental- 
ity." Ade  says,  "The  Preacher  didn't  know  what 
all  This  meant,  and  he  didn't  care."  But  the  pew- 
holders  were  "On  in  a  minute."  "He  talked  it  off 
in  just  the  Way  that  Cyrano  talks  when  he  gets 
Roxane  so  Dizzy  that  she  nearly  falls  off  the 
Piazza."  Quoting  copiously  from  "the  Great 
Poet  Amebius"  and  reciting  "eighteen  lines  of 
Greek"  and  then  growing  more  versatile  still,  he 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  133 

illustrated  from  the  "Celebrated  Poet  of  Ecua- 
dor" and  rose  to  a  climax  by  getting  "rid  of  long 
Boston  Words  that  hadn't  been  used  before  that 
Season."  "He  grabbed  a  rhetorical  Roman  Can- 
dle in  each  Hand  and  you  couldn't  see  him  for  the 
Sparks."  After  this  he  "sank  his  Voice  to  a 
Whisper  and  talked  about  the  Birds  and  the 
Flowers"  and  "there  wasn't  a  dry  Glove  in  the 
Church."  "Everyone  said  the  Sermon  was  Su- 
perfine and  Dandy."  The  only  thing  that  worried 
the  congregation  was  that  "to  retain  such  a 
Whale  it  might  have  to  Boost  his  Salary."  Then 
Ade  draws  his  moral,  which  is  commonly  to  the 
point,  "Give  the  people  what  they  Think  they 
want."  "The  time  will  come  when  they  will  not 
endure  the  sound  doctrine,  having  itching  ears, 
heaping  to  themselves  teachers  after  their  own 
lusts." 

Higher  Criticism  is  in  line  zvith  the  lusts  of 
the  modern  man.  Theodore  Parker,  the  free 
thinker,  explained  his  success  in  attracting  crowds 
on  the  ground  that  he  preached  "a  theology  which 
was  acceptable  to  human  nature."  That  is  the 
curse  of  Higher  Criticism.  A.  J.  Gordon  says, 
"Liberalism  is  the  religion  of  human  nature.  It 
does  not  make  stern  and  rigid  claims  on  men; 
it  does  not  hold  them  up  to  strong  convictions 
on  such  subjects  as  sin  and  retribution  and  the 


134  THE  FINALITY  OF 

need  of  regeneration.  Hence,  when  men  get  care- 
less and  easy-going  in  their  opinions  they  drift 
into  what  is  called  'liberalism'  as  inevitably  as 
water  runs  down  hill.  You  never  find  men  drift- 
ing into  high-Calvinism,  and  you  never  will  till 
you  find  water  running  up  hill,  and  iron  floating 
tipward  in  the  air,"  The  press  has  recently  re- 
ported the  erection  of  a  monument  in  the  North 
Benton  Cemetery,  Ohio.  Chester  Bedel,  the  fa- 
mous infidel,  who  boasts  that  he  exceeds  Bob  In- 
gersoll  in  his  unbelief,  and  who  is  reputed  to 
have  made  four  trips  to  the  Holy  Land  for  data 
with  which  to  disprove  the  Bible,  has  erected 
this  stone.  It  is  a  representation  of  himself, 
with  his  foot  upon  the  volume  of  the  Sacred 
Scriptures.  Few  are  so  intense  in  their  opposi- 
tion to  its  holy  precepts;  but  is  not  the  attitude 
the  very  one  occupied  by  many  of  the  so-called 
"Critics"  of  the  hour? 

HIGHER  CRITICISM  AS  A  PROPAGANDA. 

"And  will  turn  away  their  ears  from  the  truth, 
and  be  turned  unto  fables," 

Higher  Criticism  makes  capital  of  unwar- 
ranted concessions.  Conservatism  has  unques- 
tionably blundered.  When  its  prophets  sur- 
rendered the  theory  of  Verbal  Inspiration  they 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  135 

discarded  the  very  teaching  of  the  Word  itself, 
and  unnecessarily  conceded  the  main  point  in  the 
controversy.  There  were  many  good  men  among 
us  who  thought  to  accommodate  their  theories 
of  inspiration  to  the  demands  of  the  Criticj  by 
saying,  "If  God  did  not  give  the  words  of  Scrip- 
tures, He  at  least  inspired  the  thought."  But 
Foster  deserves  approval  for  having  so  clearly 
shown  that  when  this  concession  is  made  it  is 
easy  to  force  the  fight  to  the  point  where  no  sort 
of  inspiration  remains.  Manifestly,  if  God  did 
not  think  enough  of  this  Book  to  personally  su- 
pervise its  thought  and  expression,  so  that  it 
would  voice  His  mind  exactly,  it  is  hardly  worth 
while  for  men  to  make  much  of  it. 

When  Conservatives  affirm  that  "the  mod- 
ern miracle  is  not  possible"  they  provide  Critics 
standing  ground  from  which  to  contend  against 
the  ancient  miracle ;  and  they  have  made  good 
use  of  it.  The  Bible  teaches  the  former  as  clear- 
ly as  the  latter,  and  if  we  may  not  trust  it  in  the 
one  instance,  we  have  no  right  to  insist  upon  its 
claims  in  the  other.  The  Conservative  questions 
whether  the  sick  man,  who  rose  after  prayei, 
was  really  healed  of  the  Lord.  Mr.  Foster  agrees 
with  him  and  says,  "apply  your  principles  to  an- 
cient as  well  as  modern  times,"  adding,  "To  me  it 
would  be  a  hard,  insufferable  yoke  of  the  letter, 


136  THE  FINALITY  OP 

were  I  required  to  confess  that  Jesus  stilled  the 
storm  on  the  sea  with  a  word ;  or  that  he  walked 
on  the  surface  of  the  water  without  sinking." 
("The  Finality  of  the  Christion  Religion,"  p. 
139.)  Conservatives  have  talked  about  the  evolu- 
tion of  a  life ;  and  keeping  the  children  from  ever 
going  into  sin,  so  that  they  would  not  need  con- 
version. Critics  have  accepted  the  conces- 
sion, and  insisted  that  the  old  faith  which  regards 
"conversion  as  a  miracle"  "will  give  way  to  a 
more  continual  and  healthy  religious  develop- 
ment, to  be  interpreted  as  'order*  and  not  'mir- 
acle.'"  (p.  146).  Conservatives  have  questioned 
whether  Christ's  promise  to  return  from  heaven 
is  to  be  accepted  literally.  Critics  have  taken  ad- 
vantage of  that  doubt  to  deny  that  He  ever  went 
to  heaven,  and  scout  the  notion  that  He  ever 
even  rose  from  the  dead.  Dr.  Foster  declares 
with  reference  to  Jesus'  resurrection,  "there  is 
evidence,  therefore,  that  it  is  not  the  soul's  hope 
of  salvation;"  that  it  may  be  even  "alien  to  the 
essentials  of  Christianity,"    (pp.  135-6). 

If  there  ever  was  an  hour  in  which  Conser- 
vatives should  see  the  inevitable  result  of  com- 
promise with  doubt,  and  concession  to  unscrip- 
tural  criticism,  that  hour  is  now.  We  have 
really  provided  some  of  the  seeds  which  they 
have  sown  in  the  great  world-field,  and  for  the 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISIVL  1^7 

awful  harvest  of  skepticism    Conservatives   can- 
not be  altogether  blameless. 

The  propaganda  of  Higher  Criticism  substi- 
tutes doubts  for  dogma.  Christ  dealt  in  no  doubt. 
His  apostles  never  framed  a  skeptical  sentence. 
Higher  Critics  boast  that  they  deal  in  "no 
dogma."  Foster  says,  "We  are  saved  by  doubt 
as  well  as  by  faith."  Surely  this  is  "a  new  the- 
ology." A  man  doubts  whether  the  Bible  is  in- 
spired— and  it  helps  him.  He  doubts  whether 
Christ  was  begotten  by  the  Holy  Ghost — and  it 
strengthens  him.  He  doubts  whether  Christ  ever 
rose  from  the  grave — and  his  character  is  con- 
firmed. He  doubts  whether  Christ  ever  wrought 
a  miracle — and  it  has  a  blessedly  miraculous  ef- 
fect upon  him.  He  doubts  whether  Christ  ever 
ascended  up  to  the  right  hand  of  God,  and  it  lifts 
him  nearer  to  that  position.  He  doubts  whether 
Christ  ever  shall  return  to  the  earth  and  rule 
from  sea  to  sea,  and  it  exalts  him  to  new 
supremacy.  "New  Theology"  is  the  name !  Some- 
one tells  the  story  of  a  cat  that  set  out  to 
learn  the  secret  of  happiness.  She  met  succes- 
sively an  ox  chewing  the  cud,  a  bee  gathering 
nectar,  a  bird  singing  to  its  mate,  and  in  answer 
to  her  question  how  to  be  happy,  each  gave  a 
characteristic  reply.  The  ox  bade  her  chew  the 
cud;  the  bee,  make  honey;  the  bird,  perch  on  a 


138  THE  FINAUTY  OF 

bough  and  sing.  But  as  she  could  do  none  of 
these  things  she  sought  farther.  At  last  she 
came  to  an  owl,  and  he  advised  her  to  meditate. 
The  advice  seemed  sensible.  But  what  about? 
The  owl  answered  "Our  race  has  observed  that 
the  owl  comes  from  the  egg;  and  yet  the  egg 
comes  from  the  owl;  hence  the  question  arises, 
which  first  existed,  the  owl  or  the  egg?  I  ponder 
perpetually  upon  this  question,"  said  the  owl. 
"But,"  returned  the  cat,  "how  are  we  ever  to 
find  out?"  "Find  out,"  said  the  owl;  "we  never 
can  find  out.  The  beauty  of  the  question  is 
that  its  solution  is  impossible."  It  remained  for 
Higher  Criticism  to  build  its  religious  faith  upon 
the  same  basis. 

But,  having  found  a  resting  place  for  its 
soul,  it  could  not  therewith  be  content.  True 
meditation  is  almost  certain  to  result  in  exploita- 
tion, and  Criticism  must  speak.  The  ancient 
prophets  and  apostles  taught;  and  Paul  enjoins 
upon  Timothy,  "Do  the  work  of  an  evangelist; 
fulfil  thy  ministry."  The  modern  man  must  not 
come  short  in  this,  and  so  Criticism  converts  its 
opinions  into  a  propaganda. 

It  provides  fables  for  the  fulUlment  of  one's 
ministry.  This  is  the  charge  of  the  text.  "They 
have  turned  aside  unto  fables."  With  fables  they 
attempt  to  fulfill  their  ministry.     To  them  the 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  I39 

Bible  is  "fabulous ;"  confessedly  so.  To  them  the 
superhuman  birth  of  Christ  is  "fabulous."  His 
miracles  are  "fabulous;"  His  omniscience  is  "fab- 
ulous;" His  ascension  and  second  coming  are 
"fabulous;"  the  theory  of  substitution  is  purely 
so;  in  fact,  Christ  himself  is  fabulous.  Foster 
dares  to  liken  the  Messiahship  of  Jesus  Christ  to 
the  modern  deception  of  a  Santa  Claus.  (p.  434). 
This,  then,,  is  the  climax  of  the  whole  matter! 
Accept  such  a  foundation  for  your  faith  if  you 
like,  "but  as  for  me  and  my  house,  we  will  serve 
the  Lord."  We  will  accept  as  the  foundation  of 
our  faith  "The  apostles  and  the  prophets,  Christ 
Jesus  himself  being  the  chief  corner  stone,"  and 
join  with  Theodore  Cuyler  in  saying,  "This  Bible 
is  all  the  dearer,  not  only  because  it  has  pillowed 
the  dying  heads  of  father  and  mother,  but  because 
it  has  been  the  sure  guide  of  a  hundred  genera- 
tions of  Christians  before  them.  When  the  boast- 
ful innovators  offer  me  a  new  system  of  belief 
(which  is  really  a  congeries  of  unbelief),  I  say  to 
them,  'the  old  is  better.'  Twenty  centuries  of 
experience,  shared  by  such  intellects  as  Augus- 
tine, Luther,  Pascal,  Calvin,  Newton,  Chalmers, 
Edwards,  Wesley  and  Spurgeon,  are  not  to  be 
shaken  by  the  assaults  of  men,  who  often  contra- 
dict one  another  while  contradicting  God's 
truth." 


Chapter  VII. 

SOME  DEFINITIONS  OF  THE  NEW 
THEOLOGY. 

"And  they  took  hold  of  him  and  brought  him 
unto  the  Areopagus,  saying,  May  we  know  what 
this  new  teaching  is  which  is  spoken  by  thee  ?" 
Acts  17:19. 

It  is  quite  impossible  to  pay  one's  respects  to 
all  Athenian  theologians  of  the  hour ;  and  equally 
as  needless  to  acquaint  one's  audience  with  all 
the  latest  philosophies  of  religion.  When,  how- 
ever, a  man  perforce  his  personal  ability  or  his 
important  position,  appears  in  the  Areopagus  of 
modern  thought,  with  a  novel  theology,  it  may 
be  worth  while  to  ask  again,  "May  we  know  what 
this  new  teaching  is  which  is  spoken  by  thee?" 

Some  time  since  R.  J,  Campbell,  pastor 
of  the  City  Temple,  London,  loomed  large 
in  the  public  press.  This  was  due  to  the  com- 
bined circumstances  of  personal  capability  and 
official  distinction.  It  has  been  said  that  some  of 
the  English  papers  are  now  apologizing  for  hav- 
ing paid  Mr.  Campbell  more  attention  than  his 
mental   worth   warranted;  but  those   American 


142  THIS  FINALITY  OF 

newspapers  who  had  much  to  say  concerning 
Prof.  Geo.  B.  Foster,  need  not  join  their  English 
brethren  in  this  apology,  for  while  Foster  in  "The 
Finality  of  the  Christian  Religion"  writes  in  a 
more  pompous  style,  and  by  repeated  quotation 
and  appeal  conveys  the  impression  of  wider  re- 
search, Mr.  Campbell  is  his  companion  in  the 
new  theology,  and  more  than  his  peer  in  original 
thought  and  felicitous  expression.  Like  Dr.  Fos- 
ter he  assumes  to  be  blazing  a  new  path  for 
searchers  after  the  truth;  like  him,  also,  he  in- 
dulges in  a  philosophy  of  religion  to  the  exclu- 
sion of  Biblical  theology;  and  still  more  like  him 
he  regards  all  Conservatives  as  out  of  date,  and 
all  creeds,  built  upon  Bible  statements,  as  ("bso- 
lete.  In  the  face  of  the  fact  that  Conservatives 
hold  the  most  eminent  pulpits  in  the  world,  and 
that  his  great  predecessor,  Joseph  Parker, 
passed  away  but  yesterday,  he  unhesitatingly  pro- 
claims, "The  world  is  not  listening  to  theologians 
today ;  they  have  no  message  for  it ;  they  are  on 
the  periphery,  not  at  the  center  of  things;  the 
great  rolling  river  of  thought  and  action  is  pass- 
ing them  by" — "The  New  Theology,"  page  48. 
This  statement,  of  course,  justifies  his  plea  for  a 
"new  theology,"  and  it  may  not  be  profitless  to 
give  consideration  to  what  he  has  to  say  of  such 
subjects  as  the  Holy  Scriptures,  the  God  of  Israel, 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  I43 

Jesus  of  Nazareth,  Sin  and  Salvation,  and  the 
Judgment  to  come. 

THE    HOLY    SCRIPTURES, 

Mr.  Campbell  falls  into  the  error,  common  to 
our  times,  of  making  "the  place  occupied  by  Jesus 
Christ  the  ultimate  question  for  the  Christian 
religion."  In  this  mistake  he  has  the  companion- 
ship of  many  a  Conservative.  Critics  have  so 
often  asserted  that  Christ  was  the  starting  point 
in  our  holy  faith,  that  the  more  conservative 
brethren  have  grown  so  used  to  the  expression 
as  to  forget  that  it  involves  a  falsehood.  Christ 
is  basal  in  our  religion ;  "other  foundation  can  no 
man  lay."  But,  back  of  foundation-laying  is  the 
work  in  the  great  quarries — the  hewing  of  the 
stones!  The  Sacred  Scriptures  are  the  quarries 
of  truth!  Destroy  them,  and  no  Christ  remains 
to  the  "modern  man !"  Only  as  you  work  in  them 
does  Christ  come  before  you ;  only  as  you  "handle 
them  aright"  is  His  character  evident  enough  to 
be  an  inspiration.  Those  are  intelligent  people, 
therefore,  who  write  down  as  the  first  article  of 
their  faith,  "We  believe  that  the  Holy  Bible  was 
written  by  men  divinely  inspired,  and  is  a  perfect 
treasure  of  heavenly  instruction ;  that  it  has  God 
for  its  Author,  salvation  for  its  end,  and  truth 
without   any   mixture   of   error   for   its   matter. 


144  THE  FINALITY  OP 

Therefore  it  is,  and  shall  forever  remain,  the 
supreme  standard  by  which  all  human  conduct, 
creeds,  and  opinions,  should  be  tried."  It  is  little 
wonder  that  Campbell's  Christ  is  an  intellectual 
and  moral  phantom!  When  once  a  man  has  put 
dynamite  into  the  quarries  and  blown  them  to 
atoms,  he  can  not  be  expected  to  bring  out  of 
that  dust-heap  a  great  foundation  stone!  The 
best  that  he  can  do,  thereafter,  is  stucco  work, 
or  possibly  pebble  dash.  No  one  who  reads  after 
Mr.  Campbell  can  deny  that  he  has  destroyed 
the  quarries.  In  proof  of  this,  I  call  your  atten- 
tion to  his  definitions  of  Scripture. 

He  rejects  the  authority  of  the  Scriptures.  He 
decries  the  tendency  to  bow  to  any  external  au- 
thority, whether  of  "church,"  or  "statement  of  be- 
lief," or  a  supposed  "infallible  book"  (p.  174).  He 
affirms  "the  true  seat  of  authority  is  within,  not 
without  the  human  soul."  If  he  is  right  in  this, 
every  man  that  sails  the  high  sea  of  life,  is  far 
more  poorly  equipped  for  a  successful  voyage, 
than  is  the  modern  sailor.  The  latter  is  provided, 
from  the  hydrographic  office,  a  chart — 
showing  the  safe  waters — to  be  studied  in 
the  darkest  day  and  in  the  blackest  night!  But 
if  there  be  no  external  authority  in  the  Word  of 
God,  the  immortal  soul  is  not  so  equipped!  It 
goes  out  to  learn  the  truth,  "little  by  little,"  as  Mr. 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  145 

Campbell  himself  expresses  it,  and  to  learn  by- 
bitter  experience  of  mistakes,  of  storm,  of  shoals, 
of  shipwreck.  The  drunken  man,  reeling  through 
the  streets,  in  his  search  for  home,  is  no  more  un- 
certain in  his  movements  than  are  those  people 
who  have  flung  away  the  Scripture-chart,  and 
put  their  trust  "in  their  own  divine  nature  to 
enable  them  to  follow  the  truth."  Africans  are 
of  the  same  divine  (?)  nature  as  the  Americans, 
and  yet  those  of  them  who  know  nothing  of  the 
Word  of  God  wander  aimlessly  in  sin,  and  wal- 
low in  the  sloughs,  while  their  own  black  breth- 
ren who  have  become  familiar  with  this  Book, 
find  it  "a  lamp  to  their  feet :  a  light  to  their 
pathway."  It  is  difficult  to  be  patient  with  a  man 
who  is  himself — in  all  that  goes  to  make  him  civil- 
ized, in  all  that  has  effected  in  him  any  culture, 
in  all  that  has  created  for  him  any  Christian 
ideals — ^the  product  of  the  Bible,  when  one  hears 
him  asserting  his  independence  of  the  very  foun- 
tains of  his  strength.  Dr.  Osier's  proposition  to 
chloroform  one's  parents,  out  of  whose  lives  he 
came,  when  they  have  passed  fifty,  is  virtuous 
beside  his  behavior,  who  having  derived  his  char- 
acter from  the  Bible,  turns  about  to  deny  the  au- 
thority and  stigmatize  the  teachings  of  the  same. 
Again  Campbell  declares  "Belief  in  the 
infallible  Book  is  impossible"    ("The  New  The- 


146  THE  FINALITY  OF 

ology,"  page  178).  He  charges  it  with  irrec- 
oncilable "contradictions,"  with  "the  most  san- 
guinary exhortations;"  he  expresses  doubt  as  to 
whether  we  should  ever  have  heard  of  the  Old 
Testament  "if  it  had  not  been  for  Jesus,"  and  de- 
fines "the  New"  "as  only  a  statement  of  what 
some  good  men  thought  about  Jesus  and  His 
Gospel  at  the  beginning  of  Christian  History" 
("Tiie  New  Theology,"  p.  178-79). 

We  have  had  many  men,  in  modern  times, 
who  have  made  remarkable  statements ;  not  a  few 
of  them  have  been  remarkable  for  the  folly  they 
contained,  but  no  one  of  them  all  has  ever  ex- 
ceeded Mr.  Campbell's  statement  concerning  the 
Old  Testament  Scriptures.  The  most  advanced 
critics  have  conceded  the  antiquity  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament, and  Mr.  Campbell  is  almost  the  first  to 
hint  that  this  collection  of  sacred  books,  begin- 
ning with  Genesis  and  ending  with  Malachi,  re- 
ceived its  sacred  character  with  the  coming  of 
Jesus,  or  was  rescued  from  death  by  his  appeals 
to  the  same.  On  the  contrary,  unless  one  deny 
the  veracity  of  the  New  Testament  altogether, 
Jesus  quoted  from  the  Old  because  it  was  a  sacred 
book,  and  while  frankly  dissenting  from  some  of 
the  interpreters  common  to  His  day.  He  fully 
conceded  both  its  authority  and  integrity !  Why 
else  should  he  have  answered  the  devil  in  the  very 
language  of  the  Old  Testament,  Matt.  4  7  ?  Why 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  I47 

should  he  have  affirmed  "Think  not  that  I  came 
to  destroy  the  law  of  the  prophets ;  I  came  not  to 
destroy,  but  to  fulfill ;  for  verily  I  say  unto  you 
until  heaven  and  earth  shall  pass  away  one  jot  or 
one  title  shall  in  nowise  pass  away  from  the  law 
until  all  things  shall  be  accomplished."  Matt.  5 : 
17-18.  Why  should  he  have  declared,  "Whoso- 
ever therefore  shall  break  one  of  these  least  com- 
mandments, and  shall  teach  men  so,  shall  be 
called  least  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven;  but  who- 
soever shall  do  and  teach  them  he  shall  be  called 
great  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven."  Matt.  5  :i9.  But 
why  multiply  such  quotations?  Every  man  who 
is  familiar  with  the  Word  of  God  knows  that 
Jesus  confirmed  the  utter  authority  of  the  Old 
Testament !  To  deny  that  is  to  deny  Him,  or  else 
to  declare  that  the  New  Testament  is  no  trust- 
worthy record  of  what  He  said. 

Dr.  Campbell  concludes  his  discussion  of  the 
authority  of  the  scripture  in  perfect  accord  with 
the  custom  of  advanced  theologians,  lodging 
authority  in  inner  consciousness — whatever  that 
may  mean.  It  is  doubtless  pleasing  to  the  flesh  to 
say,  "we  are  writing  a  Bible  with  our  own  lives 
today."  It  is  almost  eloquent  to  affirm,  "every 
noble  life  is  a  word  of  God  to  the  world;  every 
brave,  unselfish  deed  is  a  ray  of  eternal  truth." 
(p.   182).    But  when  a  man  has  finished  that 


148  THE  WNALITY  01? 

speech  let  it  be  understood  that  he  has  taken  the 
old  Book  away  from  us,  and  said  "look  at  me! 
God  has  given  you  no  chart  and  compass  with 
which  to  make  your  way  over  the  world,  but  He 
has  penned  you  a  living  epistle,  and  I  am  it," — 
all  of  which  gives  point  to  Mr.  Campbell's 
quotation  from  the  witty  Frenchman  who 
said,  "In  the  beginning  God  created  man  in 
His  own  image,  and  man  has  ever  since  been  re- 
turning the  compliment  by  creating  God  in  his !" 
Mr.  Campbell  naively  accepts  the  conclusion,  say- 
ing "what  else  can  we  do?"  Our  answer  is,  "It 
is  a  poor  little  god  New  Theology  has  put  up." 
If  Conservatives  refuse  to  bow  before  it  or  him, 
let  not  the  critics  be  offended,  since  we  decline 
to  worship  ourselves. 

The  dispatch  with  which  Mr.  Campbell  ac- 
complishes this  disposition  of  the  Bible,  walking 
through  the  whole  subject  in  a  few  minutes,  giv- 
ing attention  to  but  a  few  texts,  reminds  one  of 
nothing  so  much  as  the  report  of  that  American's 
visit  to  the  British  Museum.  A  writer  says  that, 
with  the  Western  hustle,  "he  leaped  out,  kicked 
aside  the  pigeons  that  were  feeding  in  the  court, 
and  cried  to  the  uniformed  official  at  the  door: 
'Have  you  still  got  the  Elgin  Marbles  ?'  'Yes,  Sir. 
Of  course,  Sir.'  'Good!  And  the  Assyrian 
winged-bulls?'      'They're  still  here,  Sir.'    'What 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  I49 

about  those  6,000-year  old  human  remains  on  the 
second  floor — they're  not  sold  yet,  are  they  ?'  'No, 
indeed,  sir.'  Won't  you  step  in  and  see  them  ?' 
'No,  thanks,  I'll  just  take  them  as  per  catalogue. 
You  see,  I've  got  Westminister,  St.  Paul's,  the 
House  of  Parliament  and  the  South  Kensington 
Museum  to  do  this  morning,  and  I  must  get  a 
train  for  Oxford  in  time  to  run  over  the  colleges 
before  starting  for  Stratford  for  the  night.  So 
long,  sir !' " 

Dr.  Campbell  will  perhaps  pardon  some  of 
us  if  we  linger  longer  in  this  court  of  antiquity, 
if  we  study  more  carefully  its  marble  palaces, 
and  dwell  upon  the  symbolism  of  its  slain  calf, 
and  listen  with  veneration  to  what  its  ancient 
prophets  have  spoken;  pardon  us,  perhaps,  if 
while  we  linger  we  think  we  hear  God  saying, 
"these  ancient  writings  contain  My  will,"  and 
accept  their  promises  as  having  a  present  day 
application  to  our  needs,  and  answers  to  our 
hoHest  desires. 

THE   GOD   OF   ISRAEL. 

With  a  commendable  consistency  Mr  Camp- 
bell rejects  the  God  of  Israel. 

According  to  the  ,'New  Theology" TA^  JehO' 
vah  of  the  Old  Testament  was  only  a  tribal  deity. 
In    contending    that    the    Semitic    people    be- 


150  THE  FINALITY  OF 

lived  in  the  community  of  life  between  the 
worshipper  and  his  God,  he  says,  "In  the  Semitic 
mind  there  was  always  a  conviction  that  the 
deity  of  the  clan,  or  tribe,  was  the  giver  or  sus- 
tainer  of  its  life.  This  did  not  apply  to  the  minor 
divinities,  demons  of  woods  and  streams,  but  to 
the  tribal  deities — the  Chemosh  of  Moab,  the 
Dagon  of  the  Philistines,  the  Jehovah  of  Israel." 
Surely  here  is  "New  Theology"  with  a  ven- 
geance. The  claims  elsewhere  put  forth  by  Mr. 
Campbell,  that  the  Hebrews  regarded  themselves 
as  having  their  particular  god,  is  out  of  all  ac- 
cord with  what  we  find  in  their  literature.  The 
New  Testament  is  not  more  clear  in  its  teaching 
of  monotheism  than  is  the  old ;  and,  in  fact,  does 
not  so  often  declare  upon  the  subject  of  one  God, 
and  one  only — the  Creator  and  Preserver  of  all 
things — as  does  the  Old.  Even  the  missionary 
operations  of  the  New  Testament — intended  to 
bring  all  men  to  worship  this  one  God  through 
His  Son,  Jesus  Christ — are  adumbrated  by  the 
work  of  Noah,  Abraham,  Joseph,  Elijah,  and 
other  prophets  of  the  true  faith — that  "God  is 
one,  and  beside  Him  there  is  none  else." 

John  Watson,  in  the  "Mind  of  the  Master," 
writes  as  truthfully  as  beautifully  concerning  the 
Jewish  conception  of  "the  Holy  One,  who  was 
the  Lord  of  Hosts,"  saying,  "Jewish  piety  has 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  15I 

laid  the  world  under  a  hopeless  debt  by  imagin- 
ing the  austere  holiness  of  God,  and  has  doubled 
the  obligation  by  adding  His  tenderness.  It  was 
an  achievement  to  carve  the  white  marble;  a 
greater  to  make  it  live  and  glow.  The  saints  of 
Israel  touched  their  highest  when  they  infused 
the  idea  of  the  Divine  spirituality  with  passion, 
and  brought  it  to  pass  that  the  Holy  One  of 
Israel  is  the  kindest  deity  that  has  ever  entered 
the  heart  of  man.  There  was  no  human  emotion 
they  did  not  assign  to  God ;  no  relationship  they 
did  not  use  as  the  illustration  of  His  love;  no 
appeal  of  affection  they  did  not  place  in  His  lips ; 
no  sorrow  of  which  they  did  make  Him  partaker. 
When  a  prophet's  inner  vision  has  been  cleansed 
by  the  last  agony  of  pain,  he  dares  to  describe 
the  Eternal  as  a  fond  mother  who  holds  Ephraim 
by  the  hands,  teaching  him  to  go;  who  is  out- 
raged by  his  sin,  and  yet  can  not  bear  that  Israel 
should  perish:  as  a  Husband  who  has  offered  a 
rejected  love,  and  still  pleads;  who  is  stained  by 
a  wife's  unfaithfulness  and  pursues  an  adulter- 
ess with  entreaties.  One  can  not  lay  his  hand  on 
the  body  of  prophetical  Scripture  without  feeling 
the  beat  of  the  Divine  heart :  one  can  detect  in  its 
most  distant  members  the  warmth  of  the  Divine 
love."  As  Watson  has  truly  taught,  "faith  could 
take  but  one  farther  step  than  that  which  it  ac- 


152  THB  FINALITY  OF 

compHshed  in  the  Old  Testament :  that  was  to  see 
the  King  on  the  Throne,  'the  Shepherd  of  Israel," 
'the  Rock  of  one's  individual  Salvation,'  'a  very 
present  help  in  time  of  trouble,'  to  be  a  personal 
fathei ;"  and  Jesus,  who  was  also  a  Jew,  taught 
them  that;  taught  them,  as  Watson  says,  "That 
God  might  be  a  King  and  a  Judge,  but  He  was 
first  of  all,  last  of  all,  and  through  all,  the  Fath- 
er." 

Again,  one  is  tempted  to  impatience  when  he 
compares  the  God  of  the  Old  Testament  and  the 
God  of  the  New,  with  the  god  of  Dr.  Campbell's 
creation. 

The  Definition  of  the  Doctor's  god  is  misty, 
if  not  meaningless.  He  calls  "it"  or  "him"  "the 
uncaused  cause  of  all  existence ;  the  uniatry  prin- 
ciple in  all  multiplicity."  ("The  New  Theology," 
p.  17).  Again,  he  defines  God  as  "the  mysterious 
Power  that  is  finding  expression  in  the  universe, 
and  which  is  present  in  every  atom  of  the  won- 
drous whole."    (p.  18). 

Again  and  again  he  defines  Him  as  "the 
Whole  of  things."^  This  is  certainly  a  combina- 
tion of  big  expressions  with  small  thinking.  Some 
years  since  Thomas  Dixon  and  Mr.  IngersoU  en- 
gaged in  a  fiery  debate,  in  the  course  of  which 
Mr.  IngersoU  charged  Christianity  with  lack  of 
clearness  in  its  statement  of  faith,  whereupon  Mr. 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  I53 

Dixon  replied  by  reminding  the  Colonel  that  Mr. 
Ingersoll's  followers  had  started  a  society  in  New 
York  with  a  Sunday  evening  lecture,  and  its 
leader,  Mr.  Frank,  had  at  the  first  meeting,  put 
forth  the  following  clear-cut  declaration  of  faith : 
"We  'believe  in  the  superhuman  purposive  po- 
tency of  Nature.  We  look  upon  the  universe  as 
the  involution  of  the  divine  potentialities.  The 
all-potential  is  within  all  and  working  through 
all.  What  this  ultimate  divine  potentiality  is  we 
do  not  claim  to  be  fully  able  to  comprehend." 
Why  Mr.  Campbell  went  to  the  difficulty  of  an- 
other definition,  when  so  lucid  a  one  was  extant, 
seems  inexplicable,  save  on  the  supposition  that 
he  had  not  heard  of  this  one.  To  a  man  who, 
like  him,  is  tired  of  difficult  terms  and  meaning- 
less phrases,  Mr.  Frank's  definition  of  faith 
should  be  a  delight.  In  the  introduction  to  "The 
New  Theology,"  Dr.  Campbell  said,  "I  am  usu- 
ally able  to  say  what  I  mean,  and  in  the  follow- 
ing pages  my  object  is  to  say  what  I  mean  In 
such  a  way  as  everybody  can  understand."  But 
after  all,  has  the  idea  of  God  been  simplified 
when  you  turn  from  the  expression,  "God  is 
love,"  to  the  statement,  "God  is  the  un-caused 
cause  of  all  existence?"  Is  one  enlightened  by 
leaving  the  sacred  page,  where  God  is  presented 
as  "Creator  and  upholder  of  all  things,"  to  listen 


154  THE  FINAUTY  OP 

to  what  Mr.  Campbell  has  to  say  concerning  "the 
mysterious  Power  which  is  finding  expression 
in  the  universe?" 

Again,  is  one  rid  of  his  difficulty  when  he  re- 
pudiates a  God  who  created  the  heavens  and  the 
earth,  and  is  himself  above  them,  and  apart  from 
them,  as  a  separate  entity,  by  accepting  a  God 
who  is  so  identified  with  them  that  the  dog  is  one 
manifestation  of  Him,  the  cat  another,  and  even 
the  poison-fanged  serpent  that  crawls  the  earth, 
or  the  hideous  monster  that  disports  himself  in 
the  slime  of  the  sea,  a  third?  As  between  these 
difficulties  the  majority  of  mankind  will  continue 
to  do  as  has  been  their  wont,  viz.,  adopt  the  old 
notion  that  "God  is  Creator  of  the  heavens,  yet 
above  them,"  "the  Maker  of  the  earth,  yet  inde- 
pendent of  it;"  the  Father  of  our  spirits,  yet  as 
separate  and  entire,  in  himself,  as  we  are  from 
our  own  children.  Some  one  has  written,  "He 
who  is  Christ's,  surveying  the  wonders  of  Cre- 
ation, can  say,  'Glorious  though  these  things  be: 
to  me  belongs  that  which  is  more  glorious  far.' 
The  streams  are  precious,  but  I  have  the  Foun- 
tain; the  vesture  is  beautiful,  but  the  Wearer  is 
mine ;  the  portrait  in  its  every  lineament  is  lovely, 
but  that  great  Original  whose  beauty  it  feebly  de- 
picts, is  my  own.  'God  is  my  portion ;  the  Lord 
is  my  inheritance.'    To  me  belongs  all  actual  and 


tHt  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  I55 

all  possible  good,  all  created  and  uncreated 
beauty,  all  that  eye  hath  seen  or  imagination  con- 
ceived; and  more  than  that,  for  'Eye  hath  not 
seen  nor  ear  heard,  nor  hath  it  entered  into  the 
heart  of  man  to  conceive  what  God  hath  pre- 
pared for  them  that  love  Him.' "  For,  over  all 
and  above  all,  and  beyond  all,  is  God  Himself. 

JESUS   OF    NAZARETH. 

Doctor  Campbell  defines  Him  as  a  man  only. 
To  be  sure,  he  resents  this  charge,  and  claims  that 
"Christ  is  'the  only  man;' "  yet  his  statements 
bind  him  to  the  proposition  that  Christ  is  a  man 
only.  He  almost  scoffs  at  the  idea  of  His  immac- 
ulate conception;  He  insists  that  infinite  knowl- 
edge was  not  with  Christ;  His  miracle-working 
he  ignores ;  His  physical  resurrection  he  explains 
on  the  ground  that  there  is  nothing  physical,  save 
as  thought  takes  that  form.  While  ad- 
mitting that  divinity  was  in  Jesus,  he  claims  with 
equal  ardor  that  it  is  in  every  man.  He  says, 
"God  was  not  manifest  in  His  flesh  in  any  way 
that  would  cut  Him  off  from  the  rest  of  human 
kind."  Concerning  His  eternal  existence,  as  a 
co-equal  with  the  Father,  he  names  it  "a  gratu- 
itous assumption,  without  a  shred  of  evidence  to 
support  it." 

He  admits  that  He  was  the  incomparable  man. 
In  common  with  those  who  first  deny  His  deity 


156  THE   FINALITY  OF 

that  they  may  praise  His  humanity,  he  remarks, 
"It  is  no  use  trying  to  place  Jesus  in  a  row  along 
with  other  religious  masters;  we  have  no  cate- 
gory for  Him."  "His  influence  for  good  is 
greater  than  all  the  masters  of  men  put  together, 
and  still  goes  on  increasing."  He  even  admits 
Jesus  cannot  be  exceeded,  saying,  "We  have  seen 
perfect  manhood  once,  and  that  was  the  man- 
hood of  Jesus."  Apparently  he  sees  no  incon- 
sistency between  these  admissions  and  his  theory 
of  evolution  by  which  he  declares  there  has  been 
a  "gradual  and  unmistakable  rise ;  the  law  of  ev 
olution  governing  in  human  affairs  just  as  it 
does  in  every  other  cosmic  process."  But  plain 
people,  and  some  fairly  well-educated  and  con- 
fessedly intelligent  ones,  will  find  it  difficult  to 
follow  Mr.  Campbell  in  this  manipulation  of  no- 
tions. If  evolution  is  true  we  ought  to  be  on  the 
whole  forever  ascending  in  the  scale  of  human 
life,  e'en  though  we  suffer  occasional  short  peri- 
ods of  retrogression.  The  man  born  two  thous- 
and years  ago,  of  purely  human  parents,  even  of 
plain  and  unlearned  ones,  bred  in  the  inferior 
schools  of  that  time,  pressed  upon  from 
every  side  by  the  ignorant  prejudices  of  his  age, 
should  hardly  prove  the  final  product  in  the  pro- 
cess of  human  life,  the  goal  beyond  which  man- 
hood can  never  go, — ^the  climax  of  human  charac- 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  I57 

ter.  Mr.  Campbell  maintains  that  the  Old  Testa- 
ment never  prophesied  the  coming  of  Jesus ;  that 
the  promise  of  the  Seed  of  woman  to  bruise  the 
head  of  the  serpent  had  naught  to  do  with  Him ; 
that  Isaiah's  Child,  to  be  born  and  to  become  the 
Wonderful,  the  Counsellor,  the  Mighty  God,  the 
Prince  of  Peace,  the  everlasting  Father,  pointed 
only  to  a  mortal  man  who  long  since  served  his 
generation  and  passed  away;  that  even  the  53rd 
of  Isaiah  anticipates  no  suffering  Messiah. 

He  explains  Christ's  death  on  natural 
grounds — it  was  not  the  fulfillment  of  a  proph- 
ecy, but  a  collusion  of  bad  men  against  a  good 
one;  it  was  not  the  substitution  for  sin,  but  the 
meaningless  sacrifice  of  an  uncompromising  life; 
it  was  not  the  Lamb  slain  from  the  foundation 
of  the  world,  but  merely  the  vent  of  human  ha- 
tred against  holiness.  How  all  of  this  comports 
with  his  theory  that  nothing  exists  outside  of 
God;  that  God  is  in  everything,  and  everything 
is  only  some  form  of  divine  expression,  this  new 
theologian  has  not  told  us.  It  is  hardly  to  be 
expected  that  he  ever  will !  He  declares  that  had 
Jesus  been  gibbeted,  or  hung,  or  drowned,  that 
his  church  would  have  made  the  gibbet,  the  rope, 
the  water,  the  basis  of  its  call,  the  insignia  of  its 
conquest.  When  one  is  passing  through  all  this 
philosophizing  about  Christ  he  is  carried  along 


158  THE  FINALITY  OF 

by  the  writer's  ardor,  and  does  not  so  wrathfully 
resent  it;  but  when  he  lays  aside  the  book,  and 
calmly  contemplates  the  conclusion,  he  is  com- 
pelled to  say,  "not  only  unscriptural,  but  puerile," 
"not  only  irreligious,  but  insane."  There  never 
lived  a  man  of  sound  mind,  who  could  read  the 
Bible  through,  and  come  to  any  such  conclusion 
concerning  Christ,  except  he  had  first  been  tu- 
tored in  the  school  of  modern  skepticism,  dexter- 
ously initiated  into  the  order  of  the  Anti-Super- 
naturalists.  To  illustrate — One  day  there  floated 
into  the  harbor  of  Nagasaki  a  Bible,  An  intelli- 
gent Japanese  man  plucked  it  from  the  sands. 
Upon  being  told  what  it  was,  he  procured  a  Chi- 
nese translation  and  began  to  read,  and  for  seven 
years  he  pored  over  its  pages.  In  1866  he  went 
to  Verbeck — that  remarkable  man — to  tell  of  his 
experience,  and  this  is  what  he  said :  "Sir,  I  can 
not  tell  you  my  feelings,  when  for  the  first  time 
I  read  the  account  of  the  character  and  the  work 
of  Jesus  Christ.  I  had  never  seen  or  heard  or  im- 
agined such  a  person.  I  was  filled  with  admira- 
tion, overwhelmed  with  emotion,  and  taken  cap- 
tive by  the  record  of  His  nature  and  life."  It  Is 
needless  to  tell  you  that  that  unprejudiced  Jap- 
anese believed  that  Jesus  was  the  Christ  proph- 
esied in  the  Old  Testament;  born  of  the  Virgin 
but  begotten  of  the  Holy  Ghost;  that  He  lived 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  1 59 

the  life  of  spotless  purity,  and  died  the  death  ol 
atoning  sacrifice;  that  He  rose  literally  from  the 
grave,  and  in  person  ascended  to  the  right  hand 
of  God,  and  that  He  there  lives  now  to  make  in- 
tercession for  us;  that  He  is  the  actual  Head  of 
the  church ;  the  present  Conqueror,  and  the  com- 
ing King  of  Glory.  This  is  the  Christ  of  Conser- 
vatives, the  Christ  of  the  Bible,  and  the  Christ 
of  God.  Who  would  exchange  Him  for  Mr, 
Campbell's  remarkable  man,  however  matchless 
he  may  paint  him,  since  it  is  written,  "I  and  my 
Father  are  one !" 

Having  disposed  of  the  Sacred  Scriptures; 
the  God  of  Israel,  and  the  Man  of  Nazareth, 
Doctor  Campbell  addresses  himself  to 

SIN  AND  SALVATION. 

Sin  he  defines  as  only  a  shadow.  "Evil  is  a 
negative,  not  a  positive  term;  it  denotes  the  ab- 
sence rather  than  the  presence  of  something;  it 
is  the  perceived  privation  of  good,  the  shadow 
where  the  light  ought  to  be."  "The  devil,"  he 
affirms,  "is  a  vacuum."  Some  of  his  readers  will 
doubtless  fear  that  an  evil  spirit  has  gotten  into 
the  Doctor's  head. 

Now  some  of  us  had  supposed  that  sin  de- 
noted more  than  the  absence  of  something. 
Drunkenness  is  doubtless  the  absence  of  sobriety, 
but  is  it  not  also  the  presence  of  spirituous  liquors 


l6o  THE  FINAUTY  OF 

in  possession  of  a  man?  Lust  is  the  absence  of 
true  love,  but  is  it  not  also  the  supremacy  of  evil 
passions?  Murder  is  the  absence  of  the  appre- 
ciation of  life,  but  is  it  not  also  the  presence  of 
animated  destruction?  Again,  he  defines  sin  as 
"the  opposite  of  love ;"  but  is  it  not  more  ?  Is  it 
not  the  active  expression  of  lust?  So  thin  and 
shadowy  is  all  this  suggestion  that  Mr.  Campbell 
himself  grows  tired  of  it.  In  discussing  the 
Atonement  he  sanely  suggests,  "it  is  time  we  had 
done  with  unreal  talk  about  sin.  Sin  is  the  mur- 
der-spirit in  human  experience.  'Whosoever  ha- 
teth  his  brother  is  a  murderer.  If  a  man  say,  I 
love  God  and  hateth  his  brother,  he  is  a  Uar :  for 
he  that  loveth  not  his  brother  whom  he  hath 
seen,  how  can  he  love  God  whom  he  hath  not 
seen?'  Strong  language,  but  I  suppose  the  man 
who  first  used  it  must  have  known  what  he  was 
talking  about."  ("New  Theology,"  p.  i6o).  Did 
not  the  man  who  defined  "sin"  as  "the  transgres- 
sion of  the  law,  know  what  he  was  talking  about  ? 
Have  the  judges  in  the  civilized  parts  of  the  world 
had  any  occasion  to  doubt  the  accuracy  of  that 
definition?  Has  the  man  who  visits  the  red-light 
district,  or  looks  deeply  enough  into  his  own  heart 
to  see  its  recesses,  ever  doubted  the  sanity  of 
Paul's  statement  of  "the  exceeding  sinfulness  of 
sin?"  Has  not  Doctor  Campbell  himself  frankly 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  l6l 

confessed  his  surrender  to  orthodoxy  when  he 
says  "pomposity  is  sin  because  it  is  egotism ;  self- 
complacency  and  contemptuousness  are  sin  for  the 
same  reason ;  stupidity  is  sin,  whether  in  a  burglar 
or  a  doctor  of  divinity ;  a  bitter,  grasping,  cruel, 
unsympathetic  spirit  is  sin,  no  matter  who  shows 
it."  Why  does  not  the  doctor  go  farther  and  say, 
"the  wages  of  sin  is  death ;"  "the  soul  that  sinneth 
it  shall  die  ?"  All  human  experiences  attest  that 
and  all  human  observation  witnesses  to  it. 

A  stranger  thing  than  his  contention  that 
"sin  is  a  quest  for  God,"  has  never  found  expres- 
sion in  literature.  His  contention  that  the  man 
who  got  drunk  last  night  to  gratify  his  lower 
nature,  was  mistakenly,  but  "really  seeking  God," 
is  something  new  under  the  sun.  His  notion  that 
the  roue,  who  went  out  to  destroy  innocents, 
while  in  the  very  act  of  spreading  death,  "was 
seeking  God,"  is  the  shrewdest  definition  of  sin 
Satan  has  yet  conceived,  and  the  strangest  defi- 
nition of  what  God  is,  that  any  man  professing  to 
knoAV  Him  has  yet  voiced.  This  opinion  is  changed 
in  nothing  by  taking  the  whole  context  into  ac- 
count, except,  that  one  is  led  to  pity  the  author  of 
such  sentences,  when  by  the  context  it  is  made 
evident  that  he  is,  after  all,  in  no  sympathy 
with  sin. 


1 62  THE   FINALITY  OF 

It  is  little  wonder  that,  with  such  definitions 
of  sin,  one's  idea  of  salvation  should  be  conse- 
quently queer.  His  presentation  of  the  same  is 
simple  enough,  but  not  so  easy.  He  tells  men  to 
save  themselves ;  they  are  their  own  and  only 
saviours.  Chas.  Spurgeon  says  that  he  once  vis- 
ited Carisbrooke  Castle  where  King  Charles,  of 
unhappy  memory,  had  been  incarcerated.  His 
friends  had  planned  Charles*  escape;  a  boat  was 
in  waiting  at  the  water's  edge.  Under  the  shadow 
of  darkness  a  ladder  had  been  put  up  the  side  of 
the  castle,  and  it  only  remained  for  Charles  to 
scale  the  inner  walls  to  the  window,  and  all  the 
rest  was  easy!  But  alas!  he  had  no  power  with 
which  to  accomplish  that.  The  Scriptures  speak 
of  the  soul  as  "dead  in  trespasses  and  in  sin,* 
and  Mr.  Campbell  says,  "he  who  is  guilty  of  sin, 
is  guilty  of  soul-murder."  Query:  How  can  the 
dead  man  save  himself?  When  Jesus  called  Laz- 
arus with  a  loud  voice,  he  came  forth.  The  day 
is  not  yet  come  when  the  dead  rise  without  any 
divine  assistance !  That  day  Mr.  Campbell's  phil- 
osophy of  salvation  will  be  practicable,  and  not 
before ! 

THE  JUDGMENT  TO  COME. 

He  maintains  there  is  none!  "There  is  no 
such  thing  as  punishment;  no  far-off  judgment 
day;  no  great  white  throne,  and  no  judge  exter- 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  163 

nal  to  ourselves."  (p.  210).  This  is  a  doctrine  to 
delight  devils.  It  would  take  the  fear  out  of  their 
hearts.  When  they  reflect  upon  the  God  whom  they 
have  spurned,  they  will  cease  from  trembling. 
But  all  of  that  will  not  keep  them  from  the  expe- 
rience appointed  unto  the  rebels  against  love.  To 
follow  R.  J.  Campbell's  speculations,  when  Christ 
has  given  a  revelation,  is  not  to  escape  judgment, 
but  to  increase  it;  not  to  fill  up  the  lake  of  fire 
and  brimstone,  but  to  fling  ourselves  in  as  addi- 
tional fuel ;  it  is  not  to  enter  the  home  which 
God  has  prepared  for  them  that  love  Him,  but 
to  share  the  fate  of  them  who  hate  Him  and  His 
holy  law.  The  most  dangerous  power  with  which 
any  minister  or  even  mortal  man  was  ever  pos- 
sessed, is  the  power  of  mis-direction.  To  point 
people  into  the  path  that  leads  to  the  pit  by  per- 
suading them  that  it  ends  in  glory,  is  the  acme 
of  opposition  to  God,  and  the  climax  of  service 
to  the  Adversary.  For  twenty  centuries,  yea  and 
for  thirty,  men  whose  faces  have  been  lit  up  with 
the  light  of  a  better  world,  whose  feet  have  climb- 
ed the  path  "that  shineth  more  and  more  to  the 
perfect  day,"  have  walked  according  to  the  Word. 
The  fingers  of  true  prophets  and  apostles  have 
pointed  to  the  Celestial  City,  by  way  of  the  cross, 
and  to  salvation  by  way  of  the  bleeding  Son  of 
God.  I  had  rather  lay  down  my  life  than  hint  to 


164  THE  FINALITY  OF 

any  man  that  there  is  "any  other  way  given  un- 
der heaven,"  When  Sam  Hadley  died,  one  of 
the  speakers  at  his  funeral  rehearsed  the  story 
told  by  William  Arthur  in  the  "Tongue  of  Fire" 
concerning  one  of  his  old  friends,  Robert  Sut- 
cliffe.  An  aged  man  is  represented  as  coming  to 
see  him ;  they  talked  together,  and  the  visitor  said, 
"Did  you  know  that  so-and-so  was  dead?  That 
this  one  is  gone,  and  the  other,  mentioning  their 
names,"  and  Robert  Sutcliffe  answered,  "So  they 
have  all  gone !  I  suppose  some  of  these  men  will 
meet  in  heaven  and  say,  'where  is  Robert  Sut- 
cliffe ;  he  must  have  lost  his  way !'  "  He  was  still 
for  a  moment,  and  opening  his  eyes  with  a  smile, 
he  exclaimed,  "I  think  not ;  I  shall  go  home  soon, 
and  I  can  hear  those  aged  friends  of  mine  shout- 
ing as  I  climb  the  streets  of  heaven — 'Here 
comes  Robert  Sutcliffe — he  has  not  missed  the 
way.'  " 

Beloved,  if  we  accept  the  philosophies  of  men, 
and  fling  away  the  revelation  of  our  God,  what 
excuse  will  we  be  able  to  present  for  having 
missed  the  way? 


THIS  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  165 


Chapter  VIII. 


SKEPTICISM— IS  SATAN  BACK  OF  IT? 

Henry  Van  Dyke  has  contributed  an  excel- 
lent volume  entitled  "The  Gospel  for  an  Age  of 
Doubt."  For  the  most  part  it  is  a  noble  defense 
of  "the  faith  once  delivered."  In  the  first  chapter 
of  that  volume  he  reminds  his  readers  that  "There 
is  a  wide-spread  unsettlement  of  soul  in  regard 
to  fundamental  truths  of  religion,  and  also  in  re- 
gard to  the  nature  and  existence  of  the  so-called 
spiritual  faculties  by  which  alone  thes  truths  can 
be  perceived.  In  its  popular  manifestations,  this 
unsettlement  takes  the  form  of  uncertainty  rather 
than  of  denial,  of  unbelief  rather  than  of  disbe- 
lief, of  general  skepticism  rather  than  of  specific 
infidelity.  The  questioning  spirit  is  abroad,  mov- 
ing on  the  face  of  the  waters,  seeking  rest  and 
finding  none.    The  age  stands  in  doubt." 

The  so-called  Advanced  Thinkers,  occupying 
some  of  our  pulpits,  seem    to  suppose  that  the 
Gospel  for  such  an  Age  should  itself  be  "uncer* 
tain."     Many  of  them,  refusing  to  favor  home- 
opathy in  medicine,  have,  nevertheless,  carried 


l66  THE  FINALITY  OF 

its  tocsin,  "Similis  curantur  similibus"  to  the  ut- 
most extent  in  theology,  and  propose  to  save  a 
doubting  world  by  dosing  it  with  additional 
doubt,  and  we  are  even  told  now  that  "Doubt  is 
no  sin."  And,  whereas  the  Bible  tells  us  we  are 
"saved  by  faith"  and  "sanctified  by  truth,"  these 
self-styled  "Thinkers"  actually  affirm  "We  are 
saved  by  doubt"  and  "sanctified  by  skepticism." 
In  discussing  the  subject,  "Doubt — Is  the 
Devil  Back  of  It  ?"  we  want  to  take  our  position 
beside  Christ  and  listen  to  His  definitions  of 
doubt,  watch  Him  when  He  is  dealing  with 
doubt,  and  hear  what  He  has  to  say  on  the  sub- 
ject of  redemption  from  doubt,  for,  with  a 
strange  inconsistency,  the  majority  of  the  Critics, 
while  denying  the  integrity  of  the  Word,  are 
still  trying  to  cling  to  the  authority  of  Christ. 

THE   DEFINITION    OF   DOUBT. 

If  one  is  to  accept  even  the  Standard  Diction- 
ary: "Doubt  is  to  hesitate  to  accept  as  true  or 
certain."  "To  be  skeptical  concerning !"  "To  hold 
to  be  questionable  or  uncertain !    To  distrust !" 

Christ  met  men  who  maintained  toward  Him, 
toward  His  work  and  toward  His  Word,  doubt. 
These  men  were  at  that  time  naturally  divided 
into  three  classes,  and  the  same  divisions  obtain 
to  this  minute,  viz.,  the  uninstructed,  the  non- 
convinced  and  the  indisposed. 


THB  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  l67 

The  uninstructed!  Ignorance  has  always  and 
everywhere  been  the  basis  of  much  doubt.  We 
have  a  phrase  that  "Ignorance  is  the  mother  of 
creduHty."  It  is  none  the  less  the  mother  of  in- 
credulity. You  tell  the  ignorant  man  about  the 
infinity  of  space  and  instantly  he  takes  on  a  quiz- 
zical smile.  You  tell  the  ignorant  man  about  the 
multitude  of  worlds  and  the  relative  littleness  of 
the  earth,  and  his  look  as  perfectly  phrases  "Why 
don't  yon  quit  lying?"  as  if  he  voiced  it.  He 
may  be  the  recipient  of  all  the  blessings  inci- 
dent to  the  Divine  arrangement  of  the  universe, 
and  yet  see  God  in  none  of  it,  solely  because  he 
is  uninstructed.  In  the  ninth  chapter  of  John's 
Gospel  we  have  recorded  one  of  the  most  re- 
markable miracles  known  to  the  New  Testa- 
ment. A  man,  blind  from  his  birth,  is  instantly 
given  his  sight.  They  asked  him  concerning 
his  healer,  "Where  is  he?"  He  answered,  "I 
do  not  know."  They  asked  him,  "Who  is  he?" 
He  answered,  "I  do  not  know."  They  asked 
him,  "How  did  he  do  it?"  He  answered,  "I  do 
not  know."  They  said,  "The  man  who  healed 
you  is  a  sinner."  He  answered,  "Whether  he  is 
a  sinner  I  know  not ;  one  thing  I  know,  that 
whereas  I  was  blind  I  now  see."  The  man's 
unbelief  in  the  diety  of  Jesus  Christ  was  a  pure 
result  of  his  ignorance  of  Him.     When  je.sus 


1 68  THE  FINALITY  OP 

returned  to  him  and  asked  him,  "Dost  thou  b<»- 
lieve  on  the  Son  of  God?"  he  was  compelled  to 
answer,  "Who  is  he,  Lord,  that  I  might  believe 
on  Him?"  We  are  not  ready  to  say  that  this 
man  was  responsible  for  his  ignorance.  A  blind 
man  has  not  the  opportunity  of  knowedge  ac- 
corded to  others.  Nor  would  we  characterize 
him  as  a  "sinner"  because  of  his  doubt.  But 
when  the  time  came  that  the  Lord  returned  and 
stood  before  his  open  vision,  and  said  unto  him, 
"Thou  hast  both  seen  him,  and  it  is  He  that 
speaketh  with  thee"  had  he  not  then  fallen  down 
to  worship  Him,  his  continued  skepticism  would 
have  been  Satan's  triumph. 

An  impression  exists  in  some  quarters  to  the 
effect  that  men  are  being  made  skeptical  in  this 
country  by  their  increasing  knowledge.  On  the 
contrary  they  are  being  made  skeptical  by  their 
increasing  ignorance!  The  children  of  this 
generation  may  know  five  times  as  much  Science 
as  did  their  fathers  and  mothers;  they  do  not 
know  one-tenth  as  much  Scripture!  They  talk 
of  "the  assured  results  of  scientific  investigation" 
because  they  have  followed  that  far  enough  to 
feel  that  it  is  true;  and  they  talk  about  the  "er- 
rancy of  the  Scriptures"  because  they  have  so 
grossly  neglected  them  that  they  do  not  know 
their  content.     This  neglect  is  not  a  necessity; 


THS  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  169 

hence  it  is  sin.  How  then,  can  the  skepticism 
born  of  it  be  less  than  sin? 

The  non-convinced!  There  are  skeptical  men 
and  women  who  are  not  chargeable  with  ignor- 
ance of  Scriptural  things,  but  who  are  either  from 
Ireland  or  Missouri.  The  Irishman  said,  "I  am 
open  to  conviction,  but  I  would  like  to  see  the 
man  that  will  convince  me !"  And  the  Missourian 
said,  "You'll  have  to  show  me !" 

For  the  present  we  want  to  deal  with  the  lat- 
ter, and,  without  discussion,  admit  that  he  may 
be  a  perfectly  honest  doubter.  There  are  such 
men  and  there  are  such  women.  They  have 
studied  the  Scripture  some;  they  have  studied 
skeptical  men  more.  The  latter  have  filled  them 
with  interrogation  points.  It  is  natural 
that  these  men  and  women  should  be  found  in 
the  student  body.  When  Henry  Drummond  said, 
"Some  of  the  finest  young  fellows  with  whom  I 
am  acquainted,  university  men,  are  among  the 
most  skeptical,"  he  said  the  true  thing.  Why 
should  it  not  be  so  ?  The  average  man  or  woman 
who  enters  the  schools  has  never  even  read  the 
Bible  from  cover  to  cover.  He  has  dipped  in 
here  and  dipped  in  there,  and  his  knowledge 
is  neither  extensive,  intensive,  nor  systematized, 
The  very  methods  employed  in  the  school  have 
been  ignored  in  his  Biblical  training.    Great  sec- 


I70  THE  FINALITY  OF 

tions  of  the  Word,  he  has  never  seen.  At  the 
average  school  there  is  no  arrangement  whatev- 
er to  make  him  famiHar  with  it;  and  in  some 
schools  the  very  men  appointed  to. instruct  him 
in  the  same  talk  learnedly  of  the  "literary  value 
of  the  Bible"  and  reveal  at  the  same  time  their 
utter  indifference  to  its  divine  character,  and 
its  spiritual  import.  Think  of  a  freshman  in  an 
Indiana  college,  assigned  the  book  of  Job  a«"  the 
subject  of  his  essay,  putting  in  at  the  library 
to  ask  for  the  same,  and  expressing  his  surprise 
to  discover  that  it  was  in  the  Bible.  Think  of  96 
men  in  the  Northwestern  University — a  hot-bed 
of  skepticism — questioned  as  to  what  the  Pente- 
teuch  was,  and  30  of  them  unable  to  answer; 
asked  where  the  book  of  Jude  was,  and  40  of 
them  unable  to  tell  that  it  was  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament ;  asked  to  mention  one  of  the  judges,  and 
51  failing;  asked  to  name  three  kings  of  Israel, 
and  49  giving  it  up ;  asked  to  name  three  prophets, 
and  44  confessing  their  inability.  Twenty  of  those 
students  could  not  write  a  single  Beatitude.  And 
65  of  the  96  could  not  quote  one  verse  from  the 
epistle  to  the  Romans.  For  Judges  they  named 
Solomon,  Nehemiah,  Daniel  and  Lazarus.  For 
the  prophets  they  named  Matthew,  Luke,  Herod 
and  Ananias.  It  is  such  students  who  enter  a 
professor's  chair  later  in  life,  and  go  Ingersoll 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  I7I 

one  better.  Bob  Ingersoll,  blatant  as  he  was 
in  his  infidelity,  never  denied  the  immortality  of 
the  soul.  Shortly  before  his  death  he  wrote  a 
little  poem  which  runs  after  this  manner : 

"Is  there,  beyond  the  silent  night 

An  endless  day? 
Is  death  a  door  that  leads  to  light? 

We  may  not  say. 
The  tongueless  secret  hid  in  fate 

We  may  not  know: 
We  hope  and  wait." 

It  takes  a  professor  in  our  own  University— - 
Minnesota — where  doubt  is  glorified  by  some  as 
an  evidence  of  intellectual  superiority — to  be  dead 
certain  that  "there  is  no  immortality  of  the  soul," 
and  to  laugh  the  Scripture-teaching  out  of  court. 

The  Indisposed!  No  man  can  honestly  study 
the  skepticism  of  the  present  day  and  escape  the 
conviction  that  a  vast  deal  of  it  is  a  result  neither 
of  ignorance  of  the  Scripture,  nor  a  lack  of  over- 
whelming argument  in  favor  of  its  inspirattoii, 
but  it  is  rather  an  indisposition.  The  ninth  chap- 
ter of  John's  Gospel  deals  with  this  class  also. 
When  the  Pharisees  bad  been  instructed  by  the 
man  to  whom  vision  was  given  as  to  now  he  got 


172  THE  FINALITY  OF 

his  sight ;  when  he  himself  stood  before  them,  an 
undisputable  evidence  of  the  truth  of  his  words, 
they  resorted  to  the  exact  phra-e  of  n-,odem  skep- 
tics, and  discredited  his  standing,  saying,  "Thou 
wast  bom  in  sin,  and  dost  thou  teach  us?  And 
they  cast  him  out."  Jesus  immediately  appeared 
upon  the  scene  and  said,  "For  judgment  come  I 
into  this  world,  that  they  that  see  not  may  see ; 
and  that  they  that  see  may  become  blind."  The 
Pharisees  appreciated  the  point  of  His  speech, 
and  said,  "Are  we  also  blind?"  to  which  Jesus 
made  the  remarkable  answer,  "If  ye  were  blind 
ye  would  have  no  sin ;  but  now  ye  say,  We  see ; 
therefore  your  sin  remaineth."  In  other  words, 
your  skepticism  is  the  pure  product  of  a  personal 
conceit;  and  your  infidelity  is  the  fruit  of  the 
indisposition  to  be  convinced. 

Joseph  Parker  never  did  a  better  job  of  rid- 
dling skepticism  than  when  he  answered  Mr. 
Horton's  series  of  "Tentative  Suggestions"  with 
the  volume,  "None  Like  It — A  Plea  for  the  Old 
Sword."  London's  great  preacher  says,  with 
some  degree  of  sarcasm,  and  yet  with  perfect  oc- 
casion, "Unbelief  is  not  confined  to  technicalities. 
It  is  really  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  Unbelief  is 
standing  outside  the  ring-fence  of  Faith,  sobbing 
out  its  tender  heart  and  begging  Christian  schol- 
ars to  explain  how,  in  Samuel,  David  took  from 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  173 

the  King  of  Zobah  a  thousand  and  seven  hundred 
horsemen;  and  how,  in  Chronicles  he  took  from 
the  same  king,  apparently  on  the  same  occasion, 
a  thousand  chariots  and  seven  thousand  horse- 
men. Dear,  sweet,  guileless  Unbelief  is  quite 
prepared  to  enter  the  church  and  enjoy  the  sacra- 
ments, if  only  the  number  of  horses  could  be 
made  the  same  in  one  book  as  it  is  in  the  other. 
No,  no ;  that  is  not  the  measure  of  Unbelief.  That 
is  only  where  Unbelief  begins!  When  he  has 
been  satisfied  respecting  the  horse  and  his  rider, 
the  docile  Infidel  will  say,  'And  how  are  the 
dead  raised  up,  and  with  what  body  do  they 
come?'  Do  not  imagine  that  the  delightful  Infi- 
del, that  pet  of  all  juveniles,  is  only  waithig  to 
see  the  Hexateuch  properly  dated,  and  properly 
signed,  in  order  that  he  may  adopt  the  creeds 
and  idolize  'the  historic  episcopate.'  Infidelity, 
where  it  is  honest  and  courageous,  sets  its  face 
against  the  whole  line  of  the  supernatural,  the  re- 
vealed and  the  inspired,  and  not  merely  against 
certain  literal  and  obvious  discrepancies.  By  all 
means  let  discrepancies  be  reconciled  or  removed 
— scholarship  is  quite  equal  to  this  useful  work — 
but  do  not  suppose  that  the  successful  readjust- 
ment of  chronologies,  dates,  and  authorships  will 
lead  the  Infidel  to  accept  the  Bible  as  'the  inspired 
record  of  the  Word  of  God.'  I  question  whether  it 


174  THE  FINALITY  OF 

would  even  help  him  to  do  so.  Possibly  it  would 
bring  into  more  vivid  and  revolting  significance 
the  fact  that  he  'did  not  like  to  retain  God  in  his 
knowledge'"  (Rom.  1:28). 

Men  sometimes  talk  as  if  skepticism  A^erc  on- 
ly a  difference  of  thinking  and  that  one  n.:an  is 
as  much  entitled  to  his  opinion  as  the  other  Bui 
is  it  not  also  a  difference  of  living?  We  hold  to 
utter  freedom  of  thought.  It  is  the  privilege  of 
any  man  in  the  world  to  think  as  he  pleases.  But 
it  is  not  the  special  privilege  of  any  soul  on  earth 
to  escape  the  consequences  of  his  thinking.  If 
he  think  crookedly,  he  will  produce  a  harvest  of 
crime.  If  he  think  falsely  and  one  believes  him 
he  will  behave  after  the  same  manner.  If  he 
think  God  out  of  his  universe,  the  devil  will 
rciiiu  in  him  without  a  rival.  You  tell  us,  then, 
it  is  no  sin  to  doubt  the  great  verities  that  pro- 
vide the  only  foundation  for  righteousness.'*  In 
Fiance  only  a  little  more  than  a  hundred  years 
ago  they  were  spending  $450,000,000  a  year  in 
printing  and  distributing  skeptical  literature. 
What  was  the  result?  The  Bible  was  discredit- 
ed, God  was  denied,  the  Sabbath  was  abolished, 
the  church  was  paralized  in  its  every  part,  and, 
as  a  magazine  puts  its,  "Hell  broke  loose;  one 
half  the  children  born  in  Paris  were  bastards. 
1,022,351  persons  were  beheaded,  shot,  drowned, 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  I75 

outraged,  and  done  to  death  between  September, 
1792,  and  December,  1795.  Even  today  about 
one-third  of  the  births  in  Paris  are  illegitimate. 
10,000  new  born  are  fished  out  of  the  city  sewers 
in  a  single  year.  The  Republic  lives  in  the  throes 
of  its  former  infidelity."  Its  population  is  de- 
creasing. Its  suicides  .  multiply.  "Who  says 
skepticism  is  not  a  sin?"  "By  their  fruits  ye 
shall  know  them."  That  phrase  contains  the 
most  relentless  logic  that  was  ever  thrown  into 
human  speech. 

It  is  very  beautiful  to  get  around  you  a  com- 
pany of  young  men  and  women  who  have  very 
little  knowledge  of  what  you  are  talking  about, 
and  spin  your  theories,  and  set  yourself  up  as  an 
advanced  thinker!  But  who  is  going  to  reap 
the  harvest?  Who  is  going  to  hold  his  position 
when  the  whirlwind  comes?  If  we  were  asked 
what  was  the  basal  factor  in  the  world's  skepti- 
cism, we  should  answer  in  one  word — "sin!" 
If  we  were  asked  who  was  the  chief  author  of  the 
world's  infidelity,  we  should  answer  in  one  word 
—"Satan!" 

DEALING  WITH   DOUBT. 

Come  now  to  a  study  of  Christ's  dealing  with 
doubt.    Let  us  see  how  He  behaved  toward  it. 

When  genuine,  Christ  graciously  condoned  it. 
Peter  once  doubted  his  Lord's  ability,  and  the  sea 


176  THE  FINAUTY  Off 

opened  beneath  his  feet  and  he  began  to  sink. 
Jesus  did  not  say,  "Let  him  go;  he  is  only  a 
skeptic  anyhow."  But  the  moment  Peter  cried  for 
help,  He  stretched  forth  His  hand  and  lifted  him 
up.  Thomas  doubted  the  resurrection  of  Christ 
and  declared  he  would  never  believe  it  until  it 
was  demonstrated  to  his  physical  senses.  Thomas 
was  quite  a  "scientist,"  ve  would  have  you  under- 
stand !  And  Jesus  regarded  that  fact,  but  finding 
him  a  sincere  scientist,  he  made  the  revelation.  A 
leper  doubted  the  disposition  of  Christ  and  ap- 
proached him,  saying,  "Lord,  if  thou  wilt,  thou 
canst  make  me  clean."  Jesus  did  not  condemn 
him,  but  said,  "I  will,  be  thou  clean,"  because 
down  in  the  heart  of  the  doubter  was  a  sincere  de- 
sire and  a  struggling  hope.  The  epileptic's  fath- 
er doubted  the  power  of  Christ.  He  said,  "Lord, 
if  thou  canst  do  anything,  have  mercy  upon  us 
and  help  us."  Jesus  did  not  condemn  him;  he 
condoned  the  offense  and  instructed  him.  "If  thou 
canst  believe,  all  things  are  possible  to  him  that 
believeth,"  and  He  healed  his  child.  Campbell 
Morgan,  referring  to  these  incidents,  said,  "Do 
you  see  that  these  men  were  not  certain,  but  ni 
their  skepticism  they  ventured  on  Christ."  One 
came  to  him  on  a  crutch  because  he  could  not 
walk  straight.  And  the  crutch  was  a  little  "if." 
"Lord,  if  thou  wilt."    And  the  other  had  to  get 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  I77 

a  little  crutch — a  crutch  for  the  other  side.  He 
said,  "If  thou  canst,  do  something  for  my  boy." 
And  how  did  the  Master  deal  with  him?  Did 
He  say,  "No,  you  are  an  unbeliever?"  Never  I 
If  a  man  got  to  Him,  Christ  did  not  care  how  he 
came.  It  is  better  to  know,  and  to  say,  "Lord^ 
thou  canst!  I  believe!"  But  if  you  cannot 
come  that  way,  come  with  your  "if."  Only,  come  i 
The  genuine  skeptic  will  be  received.  His  doubts 
will  be  dispelled !  His  difficulties  will  be  abolish- 
ed !    His  sore  will  be  healed ! 

When  superficial,  Christ  skillfully  uncovered 
it.  We  shall  never  forget  a  time  when  Dr.  James 
Peter  Boyce,  one  of  the  most  splendid  and  per- 
fect gentlemen  and  one  of  the  most  superb  schol- 
ars America  ever  produced,  sat  in  his  chair  teach- 
ing "Systematic  Theology."  It  was  one  of  those 
days  when  he  let  the  class  run  wild  a  bit,  and  the 
boys  poured  in  a  volley  of  questions,  and  did  the 
cute  student  trick  of  making  the  old  man  recite, 
and  they  thus  escape  recitation.  He  answered 
them  as  they  came,  presenting  his  Scripture  In 
defense  of  his  positions,  easily  parrying  their 
thrusts.  Finally  a  Mexican  from  the  rear  of  the 
room,  his  face  all  aglow,  shouted  out,  "Ah,  Doc- 
tor, they  can't  catch  you !" 

But  the  one  crowd  who  found  themselve?  face 
to  face  with  a  man  who  could  not  be  caught  with 


i7^  THB  FINAI^ITY  OP 

their  captious  questions  was  the  crowd  that  came 
up  against  the  Christ;  it  is  interesting  to  nott- 
the  way  He  answered  one  such  company.  And 
mark  you,  they  were  Sadducees — they  were  the 
advanced  thinkers  of  His  day.  They  were  "the 
Liberal"  company  of  Israel.  They  weir  the 
''Scientists"  who  denied  the  possibility  of  a  mira- 
cle, and  stood  for  the  uniformity  of  natural  law 
and  for  evolution.  So  they  said,  making  their  at- 
tack upon  Moses,  who  to  this  moment  is  the  sub- 
ject of  their  attacks,  "Moses  said,  If  a  man  die, 
having  no  children,  his  brother  shall  marry  his 
wife,  and  raise  up  seed  unto  his  brother.  Now 
there  were  with  us  seven  brethren :  and  the  firsts 
when  he  had  married  a  wife,  deceased,  and,  hav- 
ing no  issue,  left  his  wife  unto  his  brother:  like- 
wise the  second  also,  and  the  third,  unto  the  sev- 
enth. And  last  of  all  the  woman  died  also.  There- 
fore in  the  resurrection  whose  wife  shall  she  be 
of  the  seven,  for  they  all  had  her?"  Now  mark 
the  answer,  "Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  them . 
Ye  do  err,  not  knowing  the  scriptures,  nor  the 
power  of  God."  And  then  to  prove  that  they  had 
no  knowledge  of  the  Scriptures,  He  went  on  and 
rehearsed  in  their  hearing  what  the  Scriptures 
taught  concerning  the  resurrection. 

If     the      skeptics     of     this      country 
should  set  themselves  to  a  serious  study  of  the 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  179 

Word  of  God,  and  be  willing  to  come  into  a  per- 
sonal experience  of  the  power  of  God,  they  would 
not  only  be  silenced,  as  were  these  Sadducees,  but 
they  could  even  be  saved,  for  we  are  saved  and 
set  free  by  the  knowledge  of  the  truth.  A  little 
while  ago,  in  the  city  of  Chicago,  a  widely  known 
skeptic  went  into  the  Ministers'  meeting  on  a 
Monday  morning  when  Dr.  James  Orr,  of  Scot- 
land, that  great  scientist  and  stalwart  defender 
of  the  faith,  was  to  speak,  and  before  he  had  fin- 
ished with  that  infidel's  ideas  and  plagiaristic  cus- 
toms, the  latter  slunk  from  the  room,  perhaps  as 
much  ashamed  of  the  weakness  of  his  late  vol- 
ume as  he  was  over  the  fact  which  Orr  brought 
out  that  he  had  filched  pages  from  a  German 
author,  using  them  as  his  own,  without  so  much 
as  a  hint  that  they  were  the  product  of  another 
mind. 

When  insincere,  Christ  severely  excoriated  it. 
He  charged  Saduccees  and  Pharisees  with  insin- 
cerity in  their  skepticism  toward  Him.  And  then 
He  called  them  "hypocrites,"  "whitened  sepul- 
chers,"  "viperous  brood."  Evidently  the  rejection 
of  the  deity  of  Jesus  was  no  light  matter  in  the 
mind  of  our  Master.  Evidently  the  rejection  of  the 
Word  of  God  was,  in  His  judgment,  nothing 
short  of  wickedness.  He  affirmed  that  the  unbe- 
lieving were  under  condemnation.  He  declared, 


l8o        .  THE  FINAUTY  OP 

that  he  that  rejected  Him  rejected  God,  and  that 
he  that  refused  to  hear  His  word  would  fall  before 
the  inexorable  judgment  of  the  same.  Think  you 
that  Jesus  did  this  because  of  personal  pique? 
Never !  He  did  it  because  he  knew  the  fruits  of 
infidelity.  He  knew  that  it  was  so,  as  Charles 
Kingsley  makes  Raphael  Aben-Ezra,  to  say  to 
Hypatia — the  brilliant,  superficial  skeptic,  who 
was  willing  to  fling  away  all  revelation  that  she 
might  follow  out  her  fine-spun  philosophies — 
"Hypatia,  I  am  older  than  you — wiser  than  you, 
if  wisdom  be  the  fruit  of  the  tree  of  knowledge. 
You  know  but  one  side  of  the  medal,  (skepticism) 
Hypatia,  and  the  fairer;  I  have  seen  its  reverse 
form  of  human  thought,  of  human  action,  of  hu- 
man sin  and  folly,  I  have  been  wandering  for 
years,  and  found  no  rest — as  little  in  wisd'3m  as 
in  folly,  in  spiritual  dreams  as  in  sensual  brutali- 
ty. I  could  not  rest  in  your  Platonism — I  will 
tell  you  why  hereafter.  I  went  on  to  Stoicism, 
Epicurism,  Cynicism,  Skepticism,  and  in  that 
lowest  depth  I  found  a  lower  depth,  when  I  be- 
came skeptical  of  skepticism  itself." 

"There  is  a  lower  depth  still,"  thought  Hypa- 
tia to  herself,  as  she  recollected  last  night's 
magic ;  but  she  did  not  speak.  What  was  the 
magic  of  last  night?  Sin!  The  very  thing  to 
which   Raphael  had  himself  been  led,   until   he 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  l8l 

says,  "I  was  on  a  level  with  my  dog — the  poor, 
dumb  brute — yea,  lower,  for  she  obeyed  the  laws 
God  had  appointed  for  her  control,  while  I  broke 
them,  everyone."  When  did  doubt  ever  bring  men 
to  do  less?  When  did  skepticism  ever  make  a 
saint  ? 

Dr.  Reuben  A.  Torrey,  at  the  close  of  a  ser- 
mon on  "Unbelief"  said,  "I  want  to  ask  every  man 
who  has  been  saved  from  intemperance,  or  other 
sin,  by  faith  in  Christ  and  the  Bible,  to  stand  up." 
Something  like  a  thousand  men  rose  to  their  feet. 
Then,  continuing,  he  said,  "Now  I  want  to  be 
fair!  I  want  any  unbeliever  who  has  been  saved 
from  his  intemperance  or  other  sin,  by  his  infi- 
delity, to  stand."  The  preacher  looked,  not  ex- 
pecting any  one  to  stand.  But  far  back  under  the 
gallery,  a  man  was  struggling  to  his  feet.  Dr. 
Torrey  said,  "Stand  up  and  tell  it  out,  my  man; 
how  did  your  unbelief  save  you?"  But  the  man 
beside  him  said,  "He  can't  tell  it ;  he's  drunk !" 

REDEMPTION    FROM    DOUBT. 

Did  Christ  have  an  antidote  for  doubt?  "If 
any  man  willeth  to  do  his  will,  he  shall  know  of 
the  teaching,  whether  it  be  of  God." 

"If  any  man  willeth!"  Willingness  ought  to 
be  a  product  of  thought.  No  man  will  ever  be 
redeemed  from  doubt  unless  he  thinks.  And  it 
cannot  be  flippant  thinking;  it  cannot  be  super- 


l82  THB  PINAUTY  OF 

ficial  philosophising.  It  ought  to  be  deep  an- 1 
profound  and  continued  thought.  David  said, 
"I  though<^  on  my  ways,  and  turned  my  feet  unto 
thy  testimonies;  I  made  haste  and  delayed  not 
to  keep  thy  commandments."  The  skeptics  are 
very  fond  of  the  phrase,  "The  thinking  man  be- 
lieves" so  and  so.  But  if  experience  is  to  be  our 
guide,  the  man  who  truly  thinks,  and  thinks 
truly,  at  one  and  the  same  time,  can  not  remain 
skeptical. 

Redemption  from  doubt  comes  by  way  of  an 
inquiring  mind.  Nicodemus  did  not  know 
whether  Jesus  was  the  Christ.  He  made  up  his 
mind  to  find  out.  He  went  into  His  presence. 
He  put  to  Him  his  troublesome  questions.  He 
came  away  from  Him  convinced.  The  Rich 
Young  Ruler  did  not  know  the  way  of  life.  He 
ran  after  the  Lord,  and  falling  at  His  feet,  madt 
inquiry.  Even  though  he  did  not  do  what  Jesus 
said,  he  went  from  His  presence  convinced. 
How  can  a  man  think,  and  yet  at  the  same  time 
believe  that  this  universe  is  not  the  product  of  an 
Infinite  Person,  possessed  of  an  Infinite  mind? 
How  men  can  prate  their  infidelity,  when  apart 
from  faith  we  can  do  nothing,  it  is  difficut  to  un  - 
dersrand. 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  l8^^ 

"Whoever  plants  a  seed  beneath  the  sod 
And  waits  to  see  it  push  away  the  clod, 
He  trusts  in  God. 

Whoever  sees  'neath  winter's  wealth  of  snow 
The  silent  harvest  of  the  future  grow, 
God's  power  doth  know. 

Whoever  says  when  clouds  are  in  the  sky — 
'Be  patient,  heart.  Light  cometh  by  and  by,' 
Trusts  the  Most  High. 

Whoever  lies  down  on  his  couch  to  sleep 
And  locks  his  sense  in  slumber  deep, 
Knows  God  will  keep. 

Whoever  says  'tomorrow'  the  unknown. 
The  future,  trusts  the  Power  alone 
He  dares  disown. 

Whoever  sees  in  death  the  eyelids  close, 
And  yet  can  live  when  life  has  only  woes, 
God's  comfort  knows." 

Redemption  from  doubt  is  accomplished  by  a 
responsive  heart.  A  man's  intellectual  difficul- 
ties may  be  solved  and  yet  he  may  not  be  saved. 
It  was  so  with  the  Scribes,  and,  beyond  doubt, 


184  THE  I^INAI^ITY  OP 

with  Felix,  also.  The  questions  were  answered, 
but  the  heart  was  still  held  by  sin.  There  is  a 
point  at  which  questions  should  cease,  and  wor- 
ship should  commence.  As  some  one  has  said, 
"When  God  called  to  Moses  to  stop;  to  come 
no  nearer  the  burning  bush,  it  was  an  indication 
that  inquiry  was  to  cease,  and  worship  was  to 
begin,"  That  is  the  point  at  which  our  thinking 
has  arrived.  We  have  glorified  "investigation" 
and  despised  "devotion."  W^e  have  proposed  to 
submit  everything  to  the  microscope  and  the 
scalpel,  and  if  we  cannot  find  the  soul,  to  deny 
it ;  and  if  with  natural  vision  we  can  not  see  God, 
to  decry  Him.  For  Moses  to  have  walked  up  to 
the  bush  would  have  been  to  find  no  fire; 
or  else  to  have  died  there  by  disregarding,  at 
one  and  the  same  time  his  sinful  condition,  and 
God's  uncompromising  holiness.  "With  the 
heart,  man  believeth  unto  righteousness."  When 
the  intellect  is  convinced,  let  the  knees  bend;  let 
the  face  go  to  the  dust,  and  God  will  speak  and 
in  the  sound  of  His  voice  the  soul  will  lose  for- 
ever its  skepticism. 

The  redemption  from  doubt  is  best  assured 
by  an  obedient  spirit.  Saul  was  not  a  doubter ;  he 
was  a  disbeliever!  He  disregarded  the  claims  of 
Christ.  He  denied  the  authority  of  His  Word. 
He  derided  the  thought  of  His  deity.    But  when 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  185 

overwhelmed  and  convinced,  he  cried,  "Lord, 
what  wilt  thou  have  me  to  do?"  And  from  that 
point,  until  the  day  when  they  led  him  out  to  his 
martyrdom,  he  never  had  a  doubt.  When  the 
spirit  of  obedience  came  in,  the  spirit  of  skepti- 
cism found  no  room.  "If  any  man  is  willing  to 
do  His  will  he  shall  knozv."  The  way  before  him 
may  not  be  fully  lighted,  but  at  its  darkest 
passage  he  will  feel  the  guiding  Hand. 

A  young  woman  says,  "I  went  through  the 
Cave  of  the  Winds  at  Niagara.  The  path  was 
narrow,  the  sound  of  the  falling  water  drowned 
every  other  sound.  The  spray  blinded  me  and  I 
could  not  see  where  I  was  going.  I  seemed  to  be 
deaf,  and  blind.  But  I  clung  to  a  strong,  steady 
hand,  and  did  not  really  feel  afraid.  The  guide 
held  me  and  drew  me  forward,  and  I  had  noth- 
ing to  do  but  follow,  until  by  and  by  we  were  in 
the  clear  shining  again." 

We  see  the  way !  Shall  we  not  walk  in  it — 
inspired  by  His  willingness  and  power  to  bring 
us  safely  home? 


Chapter  IX. 

SCIENTIFIC  SPIRIT    IN  SCRIPTURE 
STUDY. 

"Give  diligence  to  present  thyself  approved 
unto  God,  a  workman  that  needeth  not  to  be 
ashamed,  handling  aright  the  word  of  truth.  But 
shun  profane  babblings :  for  they  will  proceed 
further  in  ungodliness,  and  their  word  will  eat 
as  doth  a  gangrene :  of  whom  is  Hymenaeus  and 
Philetus;  men  who  concerning  the  truth  have 
erred,  saying  that  the  resurrection  is  past  already, 
and  overthrown  the  faith  of  some.  Howbeit  the 
firm  foundation  of  God  standeth,  having  this  seal, 
the  Lord  knoweth  them  that  are  his :  and.  Let 
every  one  that  nameth  the  name  of  the  Lord 
depart  from  unrighteousness."  (2  Tim.  2:15-19.; 

The  most  ardent  opponent  of  the  so-called 
"New  Theology"  is  not  a  conservative  "Modern" 
but  a  progressive  "Ancient."  In  Germany,  Bet- 
tex  is  looked  upon  by  Liberals  as  a  most  ardent 
opponent  of  their  opinions;  in  France  the  schol- 
arly Gaussen  was  feared,  and  with  good  reason, 
by  the  professed  Progressives ;  in  Scotland  today 
James  Orr  stands  like  a  granite  shore-line  to 


1 88  THE  FINALITY  OF 

resist  the  rising  tide  of  skepticism;  in  England 
such  men  as  Spurgeon,  Parker,  Meyer  and  Mor- 
gan have  made  the  endeavors  of  so-called  pro- 
gressive pulpits  appear  almost  pitiful;  while  in 
America,  the  names  of  the  truly  noble  who  have 
not  become  enamored  of  Athenian  theology, 
but  who  have  answered  every  Critic  so  eloquently 
as  to  exasperate  him,  are  too  numerous  to  men- 
tion. 

And  yet,  towering  above  any  one  of  them, 
and  all  of  them,  as  an  opponent  of  so-called  "New 
Theology,"  is  a  man  who  was  put  to  death  two 
thousand  years  ago  for  the  faith  that  was  in  him, 
but  who  "though  dead,  yet  speaketh,"  and  from 
whose  pen  we  take  our  text — even  Paul. 
It  is  little  wonder  that  the  Athenian  theologians 
have  asserted  that  he  was  not  inspired  and  have 
sought  to  discredit  him,  since  his  writing  antici- 
pated them  with  an  eloquence  that  is  command- 
ing, and  a  logic  that  is  relentless.  If  one  deny 
the  inspiration  of  the  Apostle  he  is  yet  com- 
pelled to  attend  upon  what  he  says.  So  colossal 
a  figure  cannot  be  counted  out  when  subjects  to 
which  he  addressed  himself  are  under  discussion ; 
and,  certainly  he  wrote  concerning  the  scientific 
spirit  in  Scripture  study. 

What  are  the  suggestions  of  this  text?  Four 
at  least,  with  their  subdivisions:    The  Scientific 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  189 

Spirit;  The  Inspired  Scriptures;  The  Skeptical 
Professor,  and  The  Philosophy  of  the  Stead- 
fast. 

THE  SCIENTIFIC  SPIRIT. 

Paul  was  no  poor  student!  Never  once  did 
he  set  his  approval  upon  ignorance,  lack  of  study 
or  research.  The  language  of  this  text  is  a  rev- 
elation of  the  Apostle's  character  and  customs. 
"Give  diligence  to  present  thyself  approved  unto 
God,  a  workman  that  needeth  not  to  be  ashamed, 
handling  aright  the  word  of  truth."  That  is  the 
scientific  spirit. 

The  scientific  spirit  manifests  itself  in  diligent 
research..  "The  Biblical  World"  for  August, 
1908,  says,  "The  time  has  come  when  the  scien- 
tific spirit  must  be  adopted  in  Bible  study."  Who 
objects?  Who  ever  did  object;  and  when?  The 
point  of  controversy  between  Progressives  and 
Conservatives  is  not  a  question  as  between  the 
scientific  and  the  unscientific  spirit.  Every  in- 
telligent Conservative  believes  in  the  research 
that  is  scientific.  And,  well  equipped  Conserva- 
tives are  quite  as  capable  of  determining  what  is 
scientific  as  are  Liberals.  It  is  a  singular  circum- 
stance when  a  man  like  R.  J.  Campbell, 
better  known  because  he  is  the  successor  to 
the  conservative  Joseph  Parker  than  for  all  other 
reasons  combined,  prates  about  the  "conclusions 


190  THE  FINALITY  OF 

of  science"  and  talks  as  if  he  was  an  expert  in  the 
whole  realm,  when  the  truth  is  that  his  educa- 
tional advantages  were  comparatively  slight,  and 
his  theological  studies  were  received  from  no 
school  whatever.  Other  men,  like  Mr.  Spurgeon 
and  Campbell  Morgan,  not  having  enjoyed  a 
theological  seminary  course,  were  Spirit-taught, 
which  is  even  better;  but  Mr.  Campbell  seems  to 
have  been  self-taught.  The  scientists  never  had 
a  chance  at  him  in  the  student  days;  and  as  for 
the  Spirit,  he  repudiates  His  instruction.  And 
yet,  being  a  Liberal,  there  is  a  wide-spread  opin- 
ion that  he  is  learned.  Alas  for  the  conceit  that 
"skepticism"  and  "smartness"  are  synonymous! 
It  was  of  that  very  thing  the  Apostle  wrote  when 
he  said  concerning  some,  "who,  knowing  God, 
glorified  him  not  as  God,  but  became  vain 
in  their  reasoning,  and  professing  themselves  to 
be  wise,  they  became  fools ;  and  exchanged  the 
truth  of  God  for  a  lie,  and  worshipped  and  served 
the  creature  rather  than  the'  Creator."  (Rom.  i : 
21,  22,  25). 

The  great  scientists  of  the  past  have,  with 
wonderful  unanimity,  believed  the  Bible,  and 
neither  Faraday,  Kepler,  nor  Newton  ever  felt 
that  they  had  to  surrender  "the  scientifiic  spirit" 
in  order  to  accept  Scripture  conclusions,  while 
Lord  Kelvin,  who,  from  the  early  age  of  twenty- 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  I9I 

two,  at  which  time  he  became  Professor  of  Nat- 
ural Philosophy  in  Glasgow  University,  down  to 
the  ripened  period  of  83 — or  61  years — brought 
his  scientific  mind  to  bear  upon  the  inspired  Book 
and  never  found  occasion  to  cast  any  part  of  it 
away,  or  call  into  question  its  utter  authority. 
Not  many  in  America  but  know  something  of  the 
scientific  accomplishments  and  professional  skill 
of  Dr.  Howard  A.  Kelley,  of  Baltimore.  He  has 
recently  contributed  an  article  to  Appleton's 
Magazine  entitled  "Out  of  Uncertainty  and  Doubt 
into  Faith,"  the  purpose  of  which  was  to  show 
that  when  he  brought  his  well-trained  mind  and 
an  open  heart  to  the  study  of  the  Bible,  he  was 
not  only  convinced  that  it  was  inspired,  but  com- 
pelled to  accept  every  one  of  its  great  doctrines, 
approve  its  plan  of  salvation,  and  yield  his  intel- 
lect and  will  to  the  authority  of  its  commands. 
He  says,  "I  found  that  the  Bible  claimed  to  be  the 
authoritative  Word  of  God,  and  by  taking  it  as 
my  text-book  of  religion,  testing  it  by  submitting 
to  its  conditions,  I  came  to  believe  the  Book  the 
inspired  Word  of  God ;  inspired  in  a  sense  utterly 
different  from  that  of  any  merely  human  book." 
"I  believe  Jesus  Christ  to  be  the  Son  of  God, 
without  human  father,  conceived  by  the  Holy 
Ghost,  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary;  that  all  men, 
without  exception,  are  by  nature  sinners,  alien- 


192  THE  FINAUTV  DF 

ated  from  God,  and  when  thus  utterly  lost  in  sin, 
the  Son  of  God  himself  came  down  to  earth,  and 
by  shedding  his  blood  upon  the  cross,  paid  the 
infinite  penalty  of  the  guilt  of  the  whole  world. 
I  believe  he  who  thus  receives  Jesus  Christ  as 
his  Saviour,  is  bom  again  spiritually  as  definitely 
as  in  his  first  birth,  and,  so  bom  spiritually,  has 
new  privileges,  appetites  and  affections;  that  he 
is  one  body  with  Christ  the  Head  and  will  live 
with  him  forever.  I  believe  no  man  can  be  saved 
by  what  is  known  as  a  'moral  life,'  such  works 
being  but  the  necessarj^  fruits  and  evidence  of  the 
faith  within."  And  Kelley  concludes,  "If  faith  so 
reveals  God  to  me,  I  go  without  question  wherev- 
er He  may  lead  me.  I  can  put  His  assertions  and 
commands  above  every  seeming  probability  in 
life,  dismissing  cherished  convictions  and  look- 
ing upon  the  wisdom  and  ratiocinations  of  men 
as  folly  if  opposed  to  Him.  I  place  no  limits  to 
faith  when  once  vested  in  God,  the  sum  of  all 
wisdom  and  knowledge,  and  can  trust  Him 
though  I  should  have  to  stand  alone  before  the 
world  declaring  Him  to  be  true." 

Who  are  these  that  are  boasting  their  scien- 
tific abilit)',  and  insinuating  that  the  Scriptures 
are  to  go  down  before  it  ?  Had  they  lighted  their 
little  candles  from  Kelvin's  torch  they  might  live 
their  lives  in  greater  light,  and  certainly  would 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  193 

have  less  to  say  concerning  "the  conflict  of  sci- 
ence and  the  Scriptures."  Had  they  g^ven  one- 
half  as  much  time  to  the  earnest  study  of  science 
as  has  Howard  A,  Kelley,  and  like  him,  turned 
from  the  study  of  God's  revelation  in  the  physi- 
cal world  to  a  careful  and  prayerful  perusal  of 
the  Sacred  Scriptures,  they  might  have  come  to 
the  same  conclusions.  Let  us  have  a  scientific 
spirit;  but  let  it  be  the  spirit  of  science  and  not 
the  spirit  of  shallowness. 

The  scientific  spirit  wUl  concern  itself  with 
the  Divine  approval.  As  some  has  put  it,  "So  far 
as  a  man  is  at  all  scientific  he  is  thinking  God's 
thoughts  after  Him."  And  the  true  Christian 
will  be  vastly  concerned  to  so  think  as  to  meet 
the  Divine  approval.  We  are  told  that  Da  Vinci's 
first  great  endeavor  to  produce  a  work  of  art  re- 
sulted solely  from  the  desire  to  please  his  studio 
master,  and  that  when  the  great  teacher  came  and 
looked  upon  it,  it  was  so  surpassingly  beautiful 
that  he  looked  upon  the  lad  and  said,  "I  shall 
never  paint  again."  The  truth  is  that  our  God 
has  deliberately  decided  to  paint  no  more  pictures 
of  revelation,  and  to  write  no  more  His  revealed 
will ;  but  he  lays  it  upon  us  to  incarnate  His  con- 
ceptions and  translate  His  revelations,  that  the 
world  shall  see  His  work  in  us.    A  true  student. 


194  THE   FINAUTY  OP 

therefore,  can  but  desire  to  secure  the  Divine  ap- 
proval upon  his  research. 

The  scientific  spirit  will  be  careful  in  the  use 
of  the  Divine  Word.  The  discoveries  of  today 
always  demand  the  preservation  and  propagation 
of  yesterday's  knowledge.  The  man  who  pro- 
poses, therefore,  to  begin  the  study  of  the  Bible 
by  despising  the  conclusions  of  his  fathers,  may 
be  regarded  as  an  iconoclast,  but  can  hardly  be 
considered  a  scientist.  This  is  not  the  morning  of 
scientific  research !  The  day  of  scientific  dis- 
covery is  well  advanced!  We  are  not  emerging 
out  of  darkness  that  makes  every  vision  new,  and 
every  treatise  original.  We  have  to  give  consid- 
eration to  what  our  fathers  thought,  and  attend 
upon  what  our  teachers  have  said.  The  Bible  has 
been  too  long  in  use  for  people  to  talk  as  if  none 
of  its  tenets  were  true.  The  youth  of  this  coun- 
try, listening  to  the  talk  of  present-day  Critics, 
have  been  brought  to  think  that  the  Koran,  the 
Eddas  of  the  Scandinavians,  the  Tribitaka  of  the 
Buddhist,  the  Five  Kings  of  China,  the  three 
Vedas  of  the  Hindoos  and  the  Zend  Avesta,  are 
all  as  ancient  as  the  Scriptures,  if  not  more  so. 
Well-instructed  men  know  this  is  false.  The 
Scandinavian  Eddas  are  1400  years  younger  than 
the  latest  Scripture;  the  Koran  700;  the  Buddist 
revelation,  while  it  antedates  Christ,  could  easily 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  I95 

have  borrowed  its  best  parts  from  the  Sacred 
Books  of  the  Old  Testament.  Practically  every 
one  of  them  was  written  before  it  came  into  ex- 
istence ;  while  much  of  that  Old  Testament  ante- 
dates the  so-called  revelations  of  China,  of  India, 
and  of  Persia.  Its  very  age,  therefore,  demands 
a  reverential  use ;  while  its  accomplishments  com- 
mand and  compel  its  sacred  study. 

He  who  professes  to  study  light,  scientifically, 
will  be  compelled  to  take  the  sun  into  account; 
and  the  man  who  proposes  to  introduce  the  sci- 
entific spirit  into  the  study  of  religion  will  be 
equally  compelled  to  consider  the  moral  luminary 
of  the  universe,  the  Book  of  books,  known 
throughout  the  world  as  "The  Bible."  By  all 
means  let  us  be  scientific ! 

THE  INSPIRED  SCRIPTURES. 

What  does  the  Apostle  mean  by  his  phrase, 
"The  Word  of  Truth  ?"  Jesus  had  already  spoken 
to  this  theme,  praying  to  His  Father  to  sanctify 
his  disciples  "through  the  truth,"  and  adding 
"Thy  word  is  truth."  Paul,  writing  to  the  Ephe- 
sians  of  "the  hope  we  have  in  Christ  in  whom  ye 
believe"  says,  "having  heard  the  word  of  truth — 
the  gospel  of  your  salvation."  Unquestionably 
James  was  speaking  of  that  part  of  the  Bible 
with  which  he  was  familiar,  when  he  declared 


196  THE  FINALITY  OF 

that  God  "of  his  own  will  brought  us  forth  by 
the  word  of  truth."  The  very  language  em- 
ployed involves  the  doctrine  of  inspiration,  the 
necessity  of  illumination  and  the  truth  of  Spirit- 
instruction. 

Inspiration  alone  can  insure  the  truth.  The 
reason  the  writings  of  the  most  scientific  men  the 
world  has  known  go  out  of  date  and  pass,  away, 
is  because  their  successors  discover  error  in  their 
conclusions.  The  most  scientific  spirit  does  not 
insure  unchangeable  conclusions;  inspiration 
alone  can  do  that.  If  you  are  going  to  have  a 
Gospel  that  will  forever  remain  "profitable  for 
doctrine,  for  reproof,  for  correction,  and  for  in- 
struction in  righteousness,"  it  must  be  inspired. 
No  fault  must  be  found  in  it.  The  reason  Har- 
vey's discovery  of  the  circulatory  system  will  re- 
main forever  a  fact,  is  not  because  Harvey  said 
it,  but  because  when  Moses  wrote  "The  life  is  in 
the  blood"  he  voiced  what  was  intrinsically  true. 
The  reason  why  the  law  of  gravity  will  have  to 
be  regarded  by  all  great  scientists,  is  not  because 
Newton  affirmed  it  to  be  a  fact.  Newton  some- 
times made  mistakes,  but  because  God  himself 
bethought  and  spoke  it,  as  Job  long  since  wrote, 
"He  hangeth  the  world  on  nothing."  The 
reason  why  our  modern  scientists  are  eschewing 
certain  animals  as  unfit  to  eat  and  favoring  oth- 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  I97 

ers,  is  not  because  of  physicians  only  (they  are 
too  often  in  error),  but  because  when  Moses 
wrote  the  Book  of  Leviticus  he  was  so  perfectly 
inspired  as  to  make  no  mistake  as  to  what  was 
under  the  ban  and  what  in  favor  from  the  stand- 
point of  human  health.  Science  reaches  accuracy 
only  after  a  thousand  experiments,  and  climbs 
into  the  light  only  after  a  long  journey  out  of 
enveloping  darkness ;  but  inspiration  speaks  once 
and  it  "standeth  fast."  It  turns  its  face  to  the 
rising  sun  and  wears  light  as  a  garment !  Of  no 
other  book  written  in  the  world  can  it  be  said,  as 
Christ  has  already  affirmed  concerning  the  Bible, 
"Thy  word  is  truth." 

And  yet,  illumination  is  essential  to  the  under- 
standing of  the  Scriptures.  "The  natural  man  re- 
ceiveth  not  the  things  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  neither 
indeed  can  he  know  them,  because  they  are  spirit- 
ually discerned.  Beecher  was  right  when  he  said, 
"The  Bible  will  not  give  up  its  secrets  to  those 
who  approach  it  with  their  bellowing  passions  and 
perverted  intentions." 

Huxley  was  supposed  to  be  a  great  scientist, 
but  confessed  that  that  part  of  his  nature  which 
might  have  enjoyed  painting  or  music  was  atro- 
phied. Does  any  man  mean  to  suggest  that  the 
carnal  man  may  not  be  so  thoroughly  lacking  in 
all  religious  intuitions  as  to  make  the  meaning  of 


198  THS  FINALITY  OP 

revelation  to  him  impossible?  When  Abraham 
Lincoln,  the  great  President,  was  visiting  in  the 
Soldiers  Home,  Joshua  F.  Speed,  his  intimate 
friend,  came  to  the  Home  to  spend  the  night  with 
him.  Rising  just  after  sunrise  he  ran  up  to  the 
President's  room.  He  found  him  reading  a  book. 
Looking  over  his  shoulder  he  found  it  was  the 
Bible.  Jocularly,  Mr.  Speed  said,  "I  am  glad  to 
see  you  so  profitably  employed!"  "Yes,"  an- 
swered the  great  Lincoln;  "I  am  profitably  em- 
ployed !"  Well,"  said  Speed,  "I  wonder  if  you  have 
recovered  from  that  skepticism  that  once  charac- 
terized you.  I  confess  frankly  that  I  have  not." 
Lincoln  looked  into  his  face  for  a  moment,  and 
then  rising,  put  his  hand  on  his  shoulder  and  ten- 
derly said,  "You  are  wrong,  Speed!  Take  all  of 
this  Book  upon  reason  that  you  can  and  the  rest 
on  faith,  and  you  will,  I  am  sure,  live,  and  die  a 
better  and  a  happier  man."  But  whether  one  re- 
ceives  it  on  reason  or  on  faith,  if  he  is  to  under- 
stand it,  the  Spirit  must  instruct  him  and  he  must 
bring  to  that  holy  instruction  a  teachable  spirit. 
Of  the  office  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  Christ  himself 
said,  "When  he  is  come  he  will  guide  you  into 
all  truth."  He  cannot  guide  a  man  who  rejects 
Him ;  nor  yet  the  man  who  refuses  Jesus  as 
Teacher,  for  of  Him  again  it  is  said,  "He  shall 


THB  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  IC^^ 

not  speak  of  himself ;  he  shall  take  of  the  things 
of  Christ  and  show  them  unto  you." 

THE  SKEPTICAI,  PROFESSOR. 

Here  is  Paul's  description  of  him:  "Shun 
profane  babblings:  for  they  will  proceed  further 
in  ungodliness,  and  their  word  will  eat  as  doth 
a  gangrene :  of  whom  is  Hymenaeus  and  Philetus ; 
men  who  concerning  the  truth  have  erred,  say- 
ing that  the  resurrection  is  past  already,  and  over- 
thrown the  faith  of  some."  What  about  the 
skeptical  Professor?    Three  things! 

First,  he  has  erred  concerning  the  truth.  Paul 
says,  in  illustration  of  his  charge  he  has  denied 
"the  resurrection."  That  is  definite  and  marvel- 
ously  up  to  date.  George  Burman  Foster  denies 
the  resurrection ;  R.  J.  Campbell  denies  the  resur- 
rection. Prof.  Willets,  in  a  recent  article,  does 
not  deny  the  resurrection,  but  does  doubt  the  im- 
maculate conception.  John  is  as  much  inspired 
as  Paul,  and  John  says,  "Who  is  a  liar  but  he  that 
denieth  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ?"  (i  Jno.  2:22). 
Concerning  the  immaculate  conception  it  is  writ- 
ten "That  which  is  conceived  in  her  is  of  the 
Holy  Spirit."  To  deny  that  is  to  face  another 
indictment  from  the  pen  of  the  Apostle  John, 
"He  that  believeth  not  God  hath  made  him  a  liar ; 
because  he  hath  not  believed  in  the  witness  that 


200  THE  FINALITY  OP 

God  hath  borne  concerning  his  Son,"  (i  Jno. 
5:10).  In  talking  some  time  since  with  a  Con- 
servative minister  concerning  certain  utterances 
by  Prof.  Willetts,  of  which  excerpts  had  ap- 
peared in  the  papers,  he  said,  "I  am  glad  to  see 
that  he  does  not  deny  the  resurrection  of  Jesus." 
But  is  not  the  denial  of  the  immaculate  concep- 
tion equally  infidel  with  the  denial  of  the 
resurrection  ?  and  either  of  them  puts  a  man  out- 
side the  pale  of  evangelical  fellowship. 

Again,  the  skeptical  Professor  has  overthrown 
the  faith  of  his  fellows.  The  word  is,  "Men  who 
concerning  the  truth  have  erred,  saying  that  the 
resurrection  is  past  already,  and  overthrown  the 
faith  of  some,"  How  often  that  thing  has  oc- 
curred, who  can  tell  ?  Not  a  few  times  in  recent 
years  have  we  had  young  men  confess  to  us  that 
in  the  course  of  their  studies  they  had  lost  their 
faith  in  Christ  as  God,  and  the  Bible  as  the  Word 
of  God.  One  of  these,  said,  "I  would  give  the 
world  to  believe  in  the  Bible  as  you  seem  to  do," 
It  is  a  terrific  arraignment  Jesus  Christ  brings 
against  those  who  destroy  the  faith  of  their  fel 
lows,  "Whoso  shall  cause  one  of  these  little  ones 
that  believe  on  me  to  stumble,  it  is  profiitable  for 
him  that  a  great  millstone  should  be  hanged  about 
his  neck,  and  that  he  should  be  sunk  in  the  depth 
of  the  sea.    Woe  unto  the  world  because  of  oc- 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  201 

casions  of  stumbling!  for  it  must  needs  be  that 
the  occasions  come,  but  woe  to  that  man  thro 
whom  the  occasion  cometh."  Walter  Scott  writes 
regarding  the  Bible : 

"Within  this  simple  volume  lies 
The  mystery  of  mysteries! 
Happiest  they  of  human  race 
To  whom  God  has  given  grace 
To  read,  to  fear,  to  hope,  to  pray. 
To  lift  the  latch,  to  force  the  way. 
And  better  had  they  ne'er  been  born 
Who  read  to  doubt,  or  read  to  scorn." 

It  is  the  boast  of  Higher  Critics  that  they  arc 
building  men  up  in  the  faith,  increasing  their 
confidence  in  the  Word,  and  so  on.  Where? 
When?  Who?  It  is  said  there  was  a  lawyer  in 
the  early  days  of  the  Indian  Territory,  named 
Mullins,  who  practiced  in  the  minor  courts  and 
who  made  a  great  reputation  for  his  ornate  lan- 
guage. He  was  engaged  in  defending  a  man 
charged  with  hog-stealing  one  day,  and,  when  it 
came  time  to  sum  up,  he  arose  and  assumed  a 
portentous  attitude  before  the  jury:  "If  your 
Honor  please,"  he  said,  "and  gentlemen  of  the 
jury:  I  would  not,  for  a  moment,  mutilate  the 
majesty  of  the  law  nor  contravene  the  avoirdti- 


202  mt  FINALITY  01^ 

pois  of  the  testimony.  But,  and  I  speak  advised- 
ly, I  want  you  homogeneous  men  on  the  jury  to 
focalize  your  five  senses  on  the  proposition  I  am 
about  to  present  to  you.  'In  all  criminal  cases 
there  are  three  essential  elements:  the  locus  in 
quo,  the  modus  operandi  and  the  corpus  delicti. 
In  this  case  I  think  I  am  safe  in  saying  the  corpus 
delicti  and  the  modus  operandi  are  all  right,  but, 
gentlemen,  there  is  an  entire  absence  of  the  locus 
in  quo."  That  is  the  difficulty  with  Higher  Crit- 
icism. Where  and  when  did  they  ever  do  less 
than  destroy  the  faith  of  their  fellows  ?  Look  at 
Germany !  It  is  an  answer  to  my  question.  Look 
at  Scotland!  You  will  see  the  question  being 
answered  at  this  moment.  Even  godless  Goethe 
was  wiser  than  the  followers  of  his  own  philoso- 
phy, for  he  said,  "If  you  have  convictions,  give 
them  to  me;  if  you  have  doubts,  keep  them  to 
yourself ;  I  have  doubts  enough  of  my  own." 

He  has  cleared  the  path  for  moral  perversion. 
"Shun  profane  babblings:  for  they  will  proceed 
further  in  ungodliness,  and  their  word  will  eat 
as  doth  gangrene."  One  of  the  most  definite  rea- 
sons for  the  prevalence  of  present-day  gilded  vice 
is  in  the  loss  of  faith  on  the  part  of  the  people. 
Our  infidel  teachers  have  brought  them  to  doubt 
whether  there  be  a  personal  God  in  the  heavens, 
whether  sin  is  regarded  of  Him,  whether  judg- 


THB  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  203 

ment  is  certain  and  whether  hell  is  a  reality,  and 
the  result  is  not  only  impenitence  but  moral  pande- 
monium. In  the  old  day  when  our  fathers  stood 
in  the  pulpits  and  in  burning  words  declared  "It 
is  appointed  unto  men  once  to  die,  and  after  that 
the  judgment,"  their  auditors  believed  them  and 
believed  God.  Penitence  resulted;  pentecosts 
came  to  pass ;  regeneration  was  produced  and  re- 
form was  witnessed.  But  where  now  do  you  find 
a  man  weeping  over  his  sins?  And  when  did 
any  new  theologian  bring  his  auditors  to  alarm 
like  that  which  smote  the  hearers  of  President 
Edwards,  lest  they  had  walked  so  long  in  the 
evil  way  that  their  feet  were  on  the  brink  of  hell  ? 
When  Jonah  preached  "Judgment"  iii  the  streets 
of  sin-besotted  Ninevah,  prince  and  peasant  alike 
repented  and  reformed !  But  a  more  unalarming 
proclamation  has  never  reached  the  ears  of  men 
than  that  which  is  phrased  in  the  so-called  "New 
Theology."  When  its  sermons  are  finished  sinners 
applaud  the  opinions  expressed  and  "proceed 
further  in  ungodliness." 

THE   PHILOSOPHY   Of   THE   STEADFAST. 

"Howbeit  the  firm  foundation  of  God  standeth, 
having  this  seal.  The  Lord  knoweth  them  that 
are  his :  and,  Let  every  one  that  nameth  the  name 
of  the  Lord  depart  from  unrighteousness," 


204  THE  FINALITY  OF 

That  philosophy  has  three  features: 

The  first  is,  an  inspired  Book.  "The  fimi 
foundation  of  God"  is  found  in  that  "all  Scripture 
is  God-breathed."  The  law  of  Moses  is  a  living 
law.  The  Song  of  David  is  an  inspired  song. 
The  Gospels  of  the  four  writers  are  a  revelation 
of  grace.  The  Word  of  the  Lord  is  an  end  of 
controversy.  The  sentences  of  the  Bible  are  both 
ancient  and  modern.  Like  the  sun,  it  is  a  long 
time  since  they  found  expression,  but  their  shining 
is  dimmed  in  nothing.  A  Hindoo  convert,  who 
bad  carried  one  Bible  until  it  was  worn  out,  spoke 
of  it  as  "ancient,"  and  then  corrected  himself,  "I 
beg  pardon,  the  cover  and  paper  are  ancient,  but 
its  truths  are  ever  new." 

The  steadfast  have  an  assured  acceptance. 
"The  Lord  knoweth  them  that  are  his."  The 
names  are  written  in  the  Lamb's  Book  of  Life. 
His  promise  is,  "I  shall  lose  not  a  one."  And  of 
the  Father  he  declared,  "No  man  shall  pluck  them 
out  of  his  hand."    No  wonder  Isaac  Watts  wrote : 

"Firm  as  the  earth  thy  gospel  stands. 
My  Lord,  my  hope,  my  trust; 
If  I  am  found  in  Jesus'  hands, 
My  soul  can  ne'er  be  lost. 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  20$ 

His  honor  is  engaged  to  save 
The  meanest  of  his  sheep; 
All  whom  his  heavenly  Father  gave, 
His  hands  securely  keep. 

Nor  death  nor  hell  shall  e'er  remove 
His  favorites  from  his  breast; 
Within  the  bosom  of  his  love 
They  must  forever  rest." 

But  the  third  feature  of  this  steadfast  philoso- 
phy is  an  irreproachable  conduct. .  "Let  every  one 
that  nameth  the  name  of  the  Lord  depart  from 
unrighteousness."  When  all  is  said  that  ought  to 
be  said  in  defense  of  the  Old  Book  against  every 
critic,  it  remains  a  fact  that  the  world  will  never 
be  won  by  argument.  Contend  for  the  faith  we 
should;  but  its  incarnation  in  our  lives  is  our 
best  contention.  A  young  man  was  asked  what 
translation  of  the  Bible  he  liked  best,  and  he  an- 
swered, "My  mother's  translation  "  \Vhatever 
men  may  do  with  the  written  epistles  of  Paul, 
John,  Peter,  or  James,  when  they  come  into  con- 
tact with  those  living  epistles  of  Jesus  Christ — 
consistent  Christian  men  and  women — who  live 
unselfishly,  who  devote  time  to  intelligent  Scrip- 
ture research,  and  who  keep  themselves  unspotted 
from  the  world,  then  they  will  be  most  profoundly 
impressed.  No  argument  can  stand  against  "the 
Word" — incarnate ! 


Chaptkr  X. 

WHAT  WILL  BE  THE  RELIGION  OF  THE 
FUTURE? 

"Other  foundation  can  no  man  lay  than  that 
which  is  laid,  which  is  Jesus  Christ.  But  if  any 
man  build  upon  the  foundation,  gold,  silver,  cost- 
ly stones,  wood,  hay,  stubble,  each  man's  work 
shall  be  made  manifest,  for  the  day  shall  declare 
it,  because  it  is  revealed  in  fire,  and  the  lire 
itself  shall  prove  each  man's  work  of  what  sort  it 
is.  If  any  man's  work  shall  abide  which  he  built 
thereon,  he  shall  receive  a  reward.  If  any  man's 
work  shall  be  burned,  he  shall  suffer  loss :  but  he 
himself  shall  be  saved,  yet  so  as  through  nre." 
(i  Cor.  3  :io-i5).  Schweinfurth's  pretentions  per- 
ished some  years  since;  Sanford  is  now  seldom 
heard  of ;  Dowie  is  dead ;  Mrs.  Eddy  either  dead 
or  alive ;  and  the  advocates  of  the  doctrine — "Mat- 
ter is  no  part  of  the  reality  of  existence" — are  in 
court  to  keep  their  unreal  hands  upon  their  tmrcal 
dollars.  And  yet,  of  the  making  of  new  religions, 
there  is  no  end.  A  Cornell  University  professor, 
who  is  not  even  religious,  has  lately  outlined  the 
coming  religion.  R.  J.  Campbell  is  engaged  in  a 


208  THE  FINAUTY  OF 

campaign  for  "The  Coming  Religion  for  Eng- 
land." Foster  has  taken  out  a  patent  on  "The 
Plans  for  Future  Faith,"  and  sells  each  copy  of  it 
at  $4.20  net.  It  would  not  be  cheap  at  half  that 
price.  It  would  seem  worth  while  for  those  of 
us  who  are  without  a  personal  axe  to  grind  in 
the  propagation  of  a  new  faith,  to  calmly  con- 
sider the  "Coming  Religion,"  and  candidly  in- 
quire what  it  will  be  like,  and  what  is  to  be  our 
attitude  toward  the  same. 

In  investigating  the  claims  of  movements, 
modem  and  ancient,  some  of  us  are  convinced 
that  Paul,  in  the  first  epistle  to  the  Corinthians, 
carefully  delineated  the  Coming  Religion,  describ- 
ing its  foundation,  defining  its  frame,  and  de- 
picting its  finial. 

THB  FOUNDATION  OF  THE  COMING  RELIGION. 

"Other  foundation  can  no  man  lay  than  that 
whilh  is  laid,  which  is  Jesus  Christ."  The  religion 
which  is  destined  to  dominate  the  future  will  re- 
tain Christ  for  its  foundation:  Christ,  as  the 
eternal  Son  of  God,  Christ  as  the  sinner's  substi- 
tute and  Christ  as  the  solitary  Head  of  the 
Church. 

Christ  as  the  eternal  Son  of  God.  At  this 
present  moment  the  real  conflict  in  the  theological 
world  rages  about  the  question  of  Christ.    A  few 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  209 

years  since  the  good  natured  Conservatives,  who 
deplored  any  debate,  were  saying,  "Whatever  the 
Critics  take  from  us,  Christ  will  remain."  And 
even  the  Critics  themselves  were  then  conceding 
that  Christ  could  not  be  touched.  Within  very  re- 
cent years,  however,  scores  if  not  hundreds  of 
preachers  have  risen  up  to  deny  the  immaculate 
conception  of  Jesus,  His  physical  resurrection 
from  the  grave,  and  His  ascension  to  the  right 
hand  of  God,  thereby  reducing  Him  to  the  level  of 
a  mortal  man.  Some  of  them  reach  this  conclusion 
by  disputing  the  authority  of  the  Sacred  Scrip- 
tures ;  others  by  the  adoption  of  the  evolutionary 
theory,  and  one  of  the  latest,  by  claiming  that 
Christ  appeared  to  him  in  person  and  confessed 
that  He  was  nothing  more  than  the  son  of  Jo- 
seph. 

But  these  are  not  new  movements.  The  deity 
of  Jesus  was  disputed  by  Scribe  and  Pharisee,  ex- 
plained away  by  Greek  Gnostics,  and  even  derided 
by  the  Rationalists  of  John's  day.  And  yet,  the 
conviction  that  He  was  none  other  than  the  Son 
of  God  has  grown,  until,  beginning  with  a  solitary 
disciple,  it  has  made  conquest  of  hundreds,  thous- 
ands, and  even  of  millions  of  men.  The  evidence 
which  convinced  an  uncultured  Roman  soldier  has 
conquered  the  logical  mind  of  a  Gladstone,  and 
excited  the  uncompromising  testimony  of  a  Web- 


2IO  THE   FINAUTY  OF 

ster.  This  biggest-brained  statesman  says  con- 
cerning Jesus,  "Every  act  of  His  pure  and  holy 
life  shows  that  He  was  the  author  of  truth,  the 
advocate  of  truth,  and  the  uncompromising  suf- 
ferer for  truth Christ  was  what  he  professed 

to  be."  In  some  quarters  people  have  questioned 
whether  Tennyson,  in  his  Universalism,  made 
Christ  the  foundation  of  all ;  but  listen,  while  he 
sings,  "What  the  sun  is  to  that  flower  Jesus  Christ 
is  to  my  soul."  The  religion  of  the  future,  if  it 
dominate  the  world,  and  do  men  good,  will  retain 
as  fundamental,  Christ  the  eternal  Son  of  God. 

And,  Christ  as  the  sinner's  substitute.  This 
notion  is  now  inveighed  against  in  some  pulpits. 
Men  professing  to  be  abreast  of  the  times,  have 
repudiated  the  blood,  "without  the  shedding  of 
which  there  is  no  remission."  To  such  an  extent 
has  this  defection  from  Scriptural  teaching  oc- 
curred that  Dr.  Augustus  H.  Strong,  on  the  oc- 
casion of  his  seventieth  birthday,  sent  a  message 
to  the  students  of  Rochester  Theological  Sem- 
inary, saying,  "I  am  distressed  by  some  of  the 
common  theological  tendencies  of  our  times,  be- 
cause I  believe  them  to  be  false  to  both  science 
and  religion.  How  men  who  have  ever  felt  them- 
selves to  be  lost  sinners,  and  who  have  once  re- 
ceived pardon  from  their  crucified  Lord,  and 
Saviour,  can  thereafter  seek  to  tear  down  his 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  211 

attributes,  deny  His  deity  and  atonement,  tear 
from  His  brow  the  crown  of  miracle  and  sover- 
eignty, relegate  Him  to  the  place  of  a  merely  mor- 
al teacher  who  influences  us  only  as  does  Socrates 
by  words  spoken  across  a  stretch  of  ages,  passes 
my  comprehension." 

Certain  pulpit  orators,  whose  audiences  are 
scarcely  an  inspiration,  are  saying,  "The  religion 
of  the  future  will  be  ethical,"  as  if  -the  old  doc- 
trine of  Christ,  the  sinner's  substitute,  was  not 
so.  To  this  Campbell  Morgan  has  well  answered, 
"If  the  great  movements  under  Wesley,  Whitfield,, 
Finney,  Moody,  were  not  ethical,  what  were  they  ? 
They  were  movements  that  took  hold  of  vast 
masses  of  men  and  moved  them  out  of  back  streets 
into  front  ones.  And  if  that  was  not  ethical  sure- 
ly nothing  can  be !  Beginning  with  the  regenera- 
tion of  a  man,  they  changed  his  environment,  and 
made  him  a  citizen  of  whom  any  city  might  have 
been  proud.    That  is  the  true  ethical  note." 

It  is  a  fact  which  history  abundantly  illustrates 
that  human  progress  is  by  way  of  human  suffer- 
ing. Some  man  must  perish  for  the  sins  of  the 
people.  The  work  of  Jesus  Christ  in  this  matter 
is'not  unique,  extraneous,  or  unnnatural;  it  was 
only  extensive,  effective,  sufficient.  If  Nathan 
Hale  could  serve  his  country  by  his  death  why 
could  not  Jesus  Christ  save  one  of  His  little 


212  THE  FINALITY  OP 

worlds  by  laying  down  His  life  in  its  behalf,  so 
that  stricken  sinners,  looking  upon  Him,  might 
yet  hope,  remembering  the  words  of  Isaiah, 
"Surely  He  hath  borne  our  griefs  and  carried  our 
sorrows.  He  was  wounded  for  our  transgres- 
sions, he  was  bruised  for  our  iniquities,  the  chas- 
tisement of  our  peace  wa  =.  upon  him,  and  with  his 
stripes  we  are  healed."  The  coming  religion  will 
told  as  fundamental — Christ,  the  sinner's  substi- 
tute! 

Christ  as  the  solitary  Head  of  the  Church! 
In  times  past  that  position  has  been  disputed  by 
the  kings  of  countries  characterized  by  establish- 
ed churches,  by  the  Popes  of  Romanism ;  and  to- 
day such  aspirants  for  office  as  Mrs.  Eddy  pro- 
pose to  share  it  with  Him.  But  it  is  written,  "He 
is  the  head  of  the  Church,"  and  some  millenniums 
ago  it  was  prophesied,  "He  shall  have  dominion 
also  from  sea  to  sea ;  and  from  the  river  unto  the 
ends  of  the  earth.  They  that  dwell  in  the  wilder- 
ness shall  bow  before  him,  and  his  enemies  shall 
lick  the  dust.  The  kings  of  Tarshish  and  the 
isles  shall  render  tribute :  the  kings  of  Sheba  and 
Seba  shall  offer  gifts,  Yea,  all  the  kings  shall  fall 
down  before  him ;  all  nations  shall  serve  him." 

Sometime  since,  in  Superior,  I  listened  to  Dr. 
J.  Wilbur  Chapman  speak  on  "The  New  Song." 
He  referred  to  the  time  when,  in  Cincinnati,  the 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  213 

great  chorus  of  the  May  Festival  of  music,  ap- 
peared, with  Patti  as  soprano,  Carey  as  alto, 
Theodore  Toedt  as  tenor,  Whitney  as  bass.  Just 
before  the  Hallelujah  chorus  there  was  a  death- 
like stillness  over  all  the  throng;  then  suddenly 
Whitney  sang,  "He  shall  reign  forever  and  ever," 
and  Carey  lifted  it  a  little  higher;  "For  He  shall 
reign  forever  and  ever,"  the  tenor  carried  it 
almost  to  the  sky,  "For  He  shall  reign  for  ever 
and  ever."  Then  the  sopranos,  as  if  they  were 
inspired,  sang,  "King  of  Kings  and  Lord  of 
Lords."  And  then,  as  if  the  angels  were  there 
with  their  questionings,  "How  long  shall  He 
reign?"  With  one  accord  they  made  reply,  "For- 
ever and  ever ;  forever  and  ever."  Then,  shouting 
as  the  voice  of  one  man,  "Hallelujah,  Hallelujah, 
Hallelujah." 

The  coming  religion  will  put  the  crown  of 
authority  on  the  same  brow  that  once  wore  the 
crown  of  thorns,  and  Christ  shall  be  all  and 
over  all!  "Other  foundation  can  no  man  lay 
than  that  which  is  laid,  which  is  Jesus  Christ." 

But  having  begun  with  the  figure  of  a  build- 
ing, Paul  continues  after  the  same  manner.  Per- 
mit us,  therefore,  some  remarks  concerning 


214  '"'^^  FINAUTY  OP 

THE  FRAME  OF  THE  COMING  RELIGION, 

The  design  of  it  is  already  in  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures. When  Moses  was  about  to  make  the  tab- 
ernacle, the  Lord  revealed  to  him  the  pattern, 
including  the  ark,  the  altar,  and  every  part  of  it, 
from  the  remotest  limits  of  the  outer  court,  to 
the  sacred  holy  of  holies,  and  then  enjoined,  "See 
thou  make  it  according  to  the  pattern  shown  to 
thee  in  the  mount."  Those  who  propose  to  frame 
the  religion  of  the  future  must  climb  God's  holy 
hill,  and  attend  again  and  again  upon  what  God 
has  spoken,  and  they  will  find  not  one  point  of 
human  experience  without  provision;  not  one 
need  of  body,  soul  or  spirit  left  in  neglect.  It 
is  all  in  the  Word! 

It  may  be  safely  asserted  that  up  to  the  pres- 
ent there  is  no  other  such  formula  of  intelligent 
faith  or  basis  of  beautiful  conduct,  as  that  re- 
vealed in  the  old  Book.  The  man  who  propo<;es 
to  put  that  aside  and  work  out  his  destiny  with- 
out the  assistance  of  design,  will  probably  discov- 
er in  crookedness  the  characteristics  of  results. 
His  creed  will  be  chaotic  and  his  conduct 
Quixotic. 

The  material  must  come  from  human  service. 
When  you  have  a  good  foundation  and  a  well 
designed  frame  you  have  not  a  house.    It  is  no 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  215 

shield  against  the  wind,  no  shelter  against  the 
storm,  no  shade  against  the  sun.  That  frame- 
work must  be  filled  in.  Paul  anticipates  this, 
and  talks  of  our  building  either  with  the  stable 
material  of  "gold,  silver,  costly  stones,"  or  the 
ephemeral  stock  of  "wood,  hay  and  stubble,"  de- 
claring "each  man's  work  shall  be  made  manifest, 
for  the  day  shall  declare  it,  because  it  is  revealed 
in  fire.  And  the  fire  itself  shall  prove  each  man's 
work  of  what  sort  it  is." 

There  are  two  classes  of  religionists  in  the 
world,  the  one  made  up  of  people  who  hold  that 
creed  is  conduct,  believing  that  if  they  accept 
the  Bible  as  inspired  from  cover  to  cover  they 
may  then  "sit  and  sing  themselves  away  to  ever- 
lasting bliss,"  and  God  will  be  well  satisfied  with 
them.  The  other  class  believes  that  conduct  is 
creed ;  if  you  only  behave  decently  it  doesn't  make 
much  difference  what  opinions  you  entertain  or 
propagate.  Both  are  wrong!  "As  a  man  think- 
eth  in  his  heart  so  is  he."  A  dead  creed,  how- 
ever true,  is  worth  nothing;  a  living  creed,  if 
true,  will  express  itself  in  approved  conduct.  The 
true  apostle  of  Jesus  says,  "I  by  my  works  show 
thee  my  faith." 

The  country  is  full  of  people  who  have  joined 
the  church,  been  baptized,  and  count  their  re- 
ligious life  complete.    At  Hull,  England,  a  man 


2l6  THE  FINALITY  OP 

went  to  Campbell  Morgan  and  said,  "Do  yon 
know,  the  strangest  thing  has  happened  to  me?" 
"What?"  said  Morgan.  "Well,  I  am  a  cabinet- 
maker, and  I  work  at  a  bench,  and  another  man 
works  by  my  side.  He  has  worked  by  my  sid« 
for  five  years.  I  thought  I  would  like  to  get  him 
to  come  to  some  of  these  meetings,  and  this  morn- 
ing I  summoned  up  my  courage  and  said  to  him, 
'Charlie,  I  want  you  to  come  along  tonight  to 
some  meetings  we  are  having  down  in  Wilber* 
force  Hall.'  He  looked  at  me  and  said,  'You 
don't  mean  to  say  you  are  a  Christian  ?'  and  I  an- 
swered, 'Yes,  I  am.'  'Well,'  he  said,  'so  am  I.' 
Wasn't  it  funny?"  he  remarked.  "Funny,"  said 
Campbell.  "Is  he  here?  If  so,  you  both  want 
to  get  down  and  start  again,  you  were  never  re- 
generated." I  believe  Campbell  was  right.  The 
coming  religion  will  never  be  advanced  by 
the  man  who  "has  a  name  to  live  but  is  dead," 
who  says  he  belongs  to  Christ  but  presents  Him 
with  no  service.  I  do  not  know  but  the  churches 
of  this  country  ought  to  enter  upon  a  campaign 
of  discipline,  and  demand  of  their  membership 
either  a  response  to  the  call  of  God,  or  a  retire- 
ment from  the  church  of  God. 

Len  Broughton  tells  the  story  of  an  old  judge 
in  the  mountains  of  Georgia,  characterized  by  his 
ignorance  of  law,  but  abundance     of     common 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  217 

sense.  Coming  into  court  one  morning  he  found 
a  witness  seated  in  the  witness  chair  with  a  shawl 
around  him.  "You,  here  to  bear  testimony?" 
"Yes."  "Put  up  your  right  hand."  "Judge,  my 
right  hand  is  paraHzed."  "Hold  up  your  left  hand 
then."  "The  left  arm  is  off."  In  a  spirit  of  semi- 
exasperation,  he  shouted,  "Stick  up  your  foot." 
But  the  witness  answered,  "Got  them  both  shot 
off  in  the  late  war."  "Then  stand  on  your  head, 
you  have  got  to  put  up  something  in  this  court !" 
Some  stand  for  the  "faith  once  delivered  to  the 
saints,"  believe  the  old  Book  is  inspired  from  cov- 
er to  cover,  and  that  its  statements  are  scientific. 
But  solemnly,  it  does  not  matter  how  orthodox 
a  man  is,  if  he  has  nothing  to  put  up  in  proof  of 
the  faith  that  is  in  him  he  is  a  parasite  on  the 
ecclesiastical  body,  and  can  only  retard  the  coming 
of  true  religion. 

The  Master  Builder  is  the  Holy  Spirit.  Of 
Him  Jesus  said,  "When  he  is  come  he  will  guide 
you  into  all  truth."  In  building,  it  is  essential  to 
have  a  leader ;  a  man  who  combines  in  one,  direc- 
tor and  commander.  Laggards  don't  like  it.  Ear- 
nest workmen  understand  its  advantages  and 
gladly  acknowledge  the  supremacy  and  receive 
suggestions.  Sometimes  you  will  find  the  master- 
builder  not  only  a  director  but  a  dynamo ;  he  has 
power  in  himself  and  he  knows  how  to  impart 


2l8  THE  FINAI^ITY  0? 

energy  to  other  people.  The  Spirit  of  God  is  such 
a  director.  The  church  that  works  under  His 
guidance  will  neither  be  crooked  nor  incompetent. 
Dr.  Gordon  says  he  used  to  be  impressed  to  see 
signs  as  he  walked  the  streets  of  Boston,  which 
read,  "Room  for  rent,  with  or  without  power." 
The  Church  of  God  cannot  afford  the  latter ;  and 
it  need  not,  since  the  Spirit  stands  ready  to  ad- 
minister its  affairs. 

The  individual  need  not  be  without  power, 
since  the  same  Spirit  is  willing  to  descend  upon 
him  and  upon  her.  If  you  are  a  clerk  in  the  shop, 
the  Comforter  will  come  there,  if  you  will  concede 
His  right  and  surrender  to  His  reign.  If  you  are 
the  manager  of  a  great  corporation  He  will  solve 
the  difficult  questions,  and  show  you  how  to  make 
both  your  cash  and  your  character  tell  for  Christ. 
If  your  are  a  mother  in  the  home,  oppressed  by 
a  thousand  cares.  He  will  teach  you  patience,  aid 
you  in  perseverence,  and  enrich  you  with  the 
results.  A  young  man  said,  'My  mother  never 
made  much  ado  about  religion,  but  as  sure  as  you 
live  she  had  it.  There  was  something  in  her  life 
that  followed  me  after  she  was  gone  until  I  was 
constrained  to  give  my  heart  to  God."  Let  me 
affirm  it  as  a  fact  that  in  the  coming  religion  men 
will  not  be  left  to  themselves  to  choose  their 
course,  think  out  the  proper  conduct  and  build 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  219 

up  the  proper  character.  The  Spirit  of  God  will 
administer,  and  men  will  marvel  at  what  He  has 
wrought  through  those  who  are  truly  the  Lord's 
own. 

The  builders  have  a  term  which  is  seldom  used 
in  every-day  speech ;  it  is  "the  finial" — "An  orna- 
ment at  the  apex  of  a  spire,  pinnacle,  or  the  like ; 
a  common  form  in  pointed  architecture  is  that 
of  a  bud  about  to  open."  How  the  idea  fits  the 
apostle's  speech,  "If  any  man's  work  shall  abide 
which  he  has  built  thereon  he  shall  receive  a  re- 
ward." 

THE  FINIAL  OF  THE  COMING  RELIGION. 

What  is  in  that  bud  ?  What  is  the  purpose  of 
it,  and  what  is  the  promise? 

Surely,  the  holiness  of  the  individual.  Paul, 
in  his  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  said,  of  Christ, 
"He  gave  some  to  be  apostles,  and  some  prophets, 
and  some  evangelists,  and  some  pastors  and 
teachers,  for  the  perfecting  of  the  saints,  unto  the 
work  of  ministering,  unto  the  building  up  of  the 
body  of  Christ,  till  we  all  attain  unto  the  unity 
of  the  faith,  and  of  the  knowledge  of  the  Son 
of  God,  unto  a  full  grown  man,  unto  the  measure 
of  the  stature  of  the  fullness  of  Christ."  (Eph. 
4:11-13).  That  is  the  meaning  of  Christ's  phrase, 
"Therefore  be  ye  perfect  even  as  I  am  perfect  " 


220  THE   FINALITY  OF 

It  refers,  not  alone  to  the  development  of  powers, 
but  to  separateness  from  sin.  A  whole  life  is 
also  a  holy  life;  hence  Christ's  command,  "Be 
ye  holy." 

Compromise  with  the  devil  will  never  make 
a  conquering  church;  and  the  professed  Christ- 
ian who  does  not  keep  himself  unspotted  from 
the  world  will  make  no  contribution  to  the  coming 
religion. 

Certainly,  the  happiness  of  the  earth.  That 
is  another  feature  of  the  finial  of  the  coming  re- 
ligion. True  religion  is  not  self-seeking ;  it  is  sac- 
rificial. It  does  not  even  so  much  concern  itself 
with  personal  ecstacy  as  it  does  with  the  happi- 
ness of  the  people.  The  evidence  of  Abraham's 
beautiful  character  is  in  the  pledge  God  made 
him,  "In  thee  shall  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  be 
blessed."  The  statement  that  forever  ends  all 
quibble  concerning  Paul's  conversion  is  his  cry 
over  unregenerate  Israel  "I  could  wish  that  I  my- 
self were  anathema  from  Christ,  for  my  breth- 
ren's sake,  my  kinsmen  according  to  the  flesh." 
The  words  of  Jesus,  as  He  overlooked  Jerusalem, 
were  abundant  testimony  of  His  sonship,  "Oh 
Jerusalem,  Jerusalem,  thou  that  stonest  the 
prophets,  and  killest  them  that  are  sent  unto  thee, 
how  often  would  I  have  gathered  thy  children  to- 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  221 

^ether,  as  a  hen  gathers  her  chickens  under  her 
wings,  but  ye  would  not!" 

More  men  profess  to  be  Christ's  than  show 
any  concern  for  His  cause.  After  consenting  to 
its  supreme  importance,  we  let  Edison  shame  us 
at  the  point  of  diligence.  Archimedes,  we  are 
told,  was  so  absorbed  in  a  problem  which  he 
traced  upon  the  sand,  that  he  didn't  know  of  the 
fall  of  Syracuse.  When  he  saw  a  Roman 
sword  drawn  on  him,  he  raised  his  eyes  to 
cry,  "Hold  your  hands  a  little;  only  spare  my 
life  until  I  have  solved  this  problem."  Beloved, 
ours  is  a  greater  problem — the  problem  of  hu- 
man happiness,  human  honor,  human  redemp- 
tion. And  if  the  coming  religion  is  to  find  a 
finial  worthy  of  it,  those  of  us  who  name  Jesus 
must  give  ourselves  diligently  to  the  solution  of 
the  same. 

Finally,  that  finial  involves .  a  home  in  heaven. 
A  Cornell  Professor  says  that  "the  coming  re- 
ligion will  deal  in  no  future!  It  will  address  it- 
self to  present  problems."  But  you  take  eternity 
from  the  views  of  men  and  you  destroy  their  in- 
terest in  the  things  of  time.  Beasts  think;  their 
reasoning  powers  are  capable  of  some  cultiva- 
tion, but  they  are  without  hope  for  the  future,  and 
their  aspirations  never  rise  above  the  expression 
of  utter  selfishness.     Their  whole  world  is  one 


222  THE  FINALITY  OF 

in  which  every  individual  is  for  himself,  and 
the  devil  gets  the  hindermost.  Thank  God,  the 
religion  of  the  future,  like  the  true  religion  of  the 
past,  will  present  another  prospect,  will  hold 
out  another  promise.  Jesus  has  voiced  it,  "In  my 
Father's  house  are  many  mansions ;  if  it  were  not 
so  I  would  have  told  you,  for  I  go  to  prepare 
a  place  for  you.  And  if  I  go  and  prepare  a  place 
for  you  I  will  come  again  and  receive  you  unto 
myself,  that  where  I  am  there  ye  may  be  also." 

Do  you  remember  how  in  "Marble  Faun" 
Hawthorne  presents  Donatello  and  Miriam  as 
wandering  aimlessly  along  a  street  at  the  end  of 
which  stood  Hilda's  tower?  He  says  "There 
was  a  light  in  her  high  chamber;  a  light  too,  at 
the  Virgin's  shrine.  And  the  glimmer  of  these 
two  was  the  loftiest  light  beneath  the  stars. 
Miriam  drew  Danatello's  arm  to  make  him  stop. 
And  while  they  stood  at  some  distance,  looking 
at  Hilda's  window,  they  beheld  her  approach  and 
throw  it  open.  She  leaned  far  forth  and  extend- 
ed her  clasped  hands  towards  the  sky.  "The 
good,  pure,  child!  She  is  praying,  Donatello," 
said  Miriam,  with  a  kind  of  simple  joy  at  witness- 
ing the  devoutness  of  her  friend.  Then  her  own 
sin  rushed  upon  her,  and  she  shouted,  with  the 
rich  strength  of  her  voice,  "Pray  for  us,  Hilda; 
we  need  it !"    Whether  Hilda  heard  and  recogniz- 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM.  223 

ed  the  voice  we  cannot  tell.  The  window  was  im- 
mediately closed,  and  her  form  disappeared  from 
behind  the  snowy  curtain.  Miriam  felt  this  to  be 
a  token  that  the  cry  of  her  condemned  spirit  was 
shut  out  of  heaven.  Without  hope  of  it  she  felt 
her  life  to  be  not  worth  the  living.  No  religion 
which  despises  Heaven  will  ever  command  the 
deep  interest  in  men.  In  the  future,  as  in  the 
past,  that  synonym  of  all  conceivable  happiness — 
Heaven — will  hold  to  itself  all  pure  hearts  and  all 
righteous  hopes.  The  angels  must  pity  the  man, 
and,  even  with  strong  crying  and  tears,  commiser- 
ate the  woman  who  misses  it! 


I? 
inn 


THE  LIBRARY 
UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 

Santa  Barbara 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW. 


lOOM  11/86  Series  9482 


A    001  004  777     7 


